F 22 

.P83 
Copy 1 -t 



AN 



ADDRESS 



TWO-HUNDRED AND FIFTY-EIGHTH ANNIVERSARY 



planting of t\jt ||0pljam Cokixg. 



HON. JAMES W. PATTERSON. 



THE POPHAM COLONY 



i^< 



A DISCUSSION OF ITS HISTORICAL CLAIMS 



BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE SUBJECI 




BOS T O N 
WIGGIN AND LUNT, 13 SCHOOL STREET 

1866 



IStiition, Kf^vH J^unticetr Qto^ieu. 



y/^</ fY ^ 1 



BOSTON: PRESS OF ALFRED MUDGE & SON. 



PUBLISHERS' ADVERTISEMENT. 



Ill the following discussion, the arguments for and against the 
liistorical claims of the English Colony that landed at the mouth 
of the Kennebec River, August 19, (0, S.) 1607, are presented in 
an able and comprehensive manner. The articles, when they 
appeared in the columns of a daily newspaper, attracted much 
attention; and, as they contain matter of permanent historical 
interest, we have deemed them worthy of preservation in a col- 
lected form. 

The writers can have no further motive for withholding their 
names. We therefore state that " P." is Mr. William Feederick 
Poole, Librarian of the Boston Athena?um ; that " Sabino " is 
Rev. Edward Ballard, D. D., of Brunswick, Me. ; and that 
" Orient " and " Sagadahoc " are the signatures of Mr. Frederic 
Kidder, of Boston. 

Each year, since the first Popham Celebration in 1862, memo- 
rial services have been held on the Anniversary of the Landing 
in 1607. Public addresses have been delivered on these occa- 
sions, and these have usually been printed. Mr. John A. Poor, 
of Portland, Me., delivered the Oration in 1862; Mr. George 
Folsom, of New York, in 1863; Mr. Edward E. Bourne, of 
Kennebunk, Maine, in 1864; and Prof. James W. Patterson, 
of Dartmouth College, in 1865. 

This discussion arose from a notice by Mr. Poole, in the Bos- 
ton Daily Advertiser of April 11, 1866, of Prof. Patterson's 
Address which appeared about that time in print. In this notice 
the writer sharply assailed the claims for the Popham Colony, 
as set forth by the orator, and also by Mr. Kidder in a Letter 



which the Publishing Committee of the Celebration had printed 
as an Appendix to the Address. Dr. Ballard replied in the 
Boston Daily Advertiser of April 21 ; and Mr. Kidder in the 
Portland Advertiser of April 26. From this point, the disputants 
came into close quarters on the general merits of the question. 

As earnest historical discussion too often leads to bitterness 
and estrangement, we are happy to state that such has not been 
the result in this instance. "P.," whose notice brought on 
the discussion, received an official invitation to attend the Pop- 
ham Celel)ration in August last, which he accepted. One of our 
firm, who was also present, can state that the hospitality of the 
Maine gentlemen named in the following extract from the report 
of the Celebration in the Boston Daily Advertiser, of September 
1, is not over-stated: — 

" I see to-day, among the guests from Massachusetts, your cor- 
respondent " P.," who has written of late some hard things respect- 
ing this Popham Colonj^ He is receiving every personal attention 
from Rev. Dr. Ballard, (" Sabino,") President Woods, Hon. Chas. 
J. Oilman and others ; and the merry peals of laughter, that burst 
occasionally from the group, indicate that difference of opinion on 
historical questions need not disturb the harmon}' of social inter- 
course. As I finish this report in Bath, I understand that Dr. 
Ballard and the other gentlemen named have captured their friend- 
ly detractor, and taken him home with them to Brunswick, Avhere 
he will doubtless receive good treatment." 

The Bibliography of the Popham Colony, which is appended, 
was compiled, at our request, by Mr. Poole ; and, so far as the 
newspaper articles, and the minor pieces connected with the first 
Celebration, are concerned, it was made chiefly from the collection 
preserved by Mr. Joliii Wingate Thornton, of Boston, who has 
kindly placed them in our hands for that purpose. The list 
was then sent to Dr. Ballard, who has contributed the 'articles 
in his possession which were not already included. 

W. & L. 



[Boston Daily Advertiser, Aiml 11, 18G6.] 

THE LAST POPHAM ADDRESS. 

We find another contribution to the literature of Popliam, in 
the elegantly printed Address of the Hon. James W. Patterson, 
delivered at the Peninsula of Sabino, on the 258th Popham An- 
niversary ; which, as all the world knows without our giving the 
information, was August 29, 1865. Thick, creamy paper, John 
Wilson and Sons' best typography, and Mr. Wiggin's imprint, 
were among the least of the motives that induced us to seize 
upon and devour the contents of this delectable pamphlet. 

We confess to a partiality for Popham literature. Its theory 
is so original, so free from conventional trammels, so utterly at 
variance with the accepted facts of history, that it is often diffi- 
cult to persuade one's self that its advocates intend anything 
more than historical waggery. So we read on, as in other fic- 
tion, to be amused. 

A false theory zealously defended commonly finds more sym- 
pathy than the truth feebly supported. The Pophamites have 
nailed their flag to the mast, and ask for no favors from any 
quarter. We admire their pluck, and, for their sakes, regret 
that they have so few historical verities in their ammunition 
locker. We have read their " Memorial Volume," from title- 
page to errata, as well as Mr. Poor's facetious Addenda in " Vin- 
dication of Sir Ferdinando Gorges ;" not shying either at his 
Appendix of fifty-two solid nonpareil pages. Every other Ad- 
dress on the subject, and every scrap of newspaper controversy 
accessible, we have diligently perused ; and yet the impression 
remains on the mind that the facts to sustain this extraordinary 



6 



theory have not yet been deveh^ped. For some reason, (perhaps 
to sui-prise us the more when it does come,) the stern logic o 
truth is withheld; and we are served to empty assertion and 
vapid declamation in its stead. Every new publication, there- 
fore, of Popham origin, or from the Maine Historical Society, is 
of interest, as possibly it may contain the suppressed develop- 
ments rivinouth and Massachusetts Bay are waiting, gracefully 
to yield th; honors awarded them in history for u.ore than two 
hundred vears to "the Church Colony" of Sagadahoc. Is the 
pamphlet before us the coming document ? Let us see 

Mr Patterson is well known as a gentleman and a scholar. He 
has^ been Professor at Dartmouth College, and now is Representa- 
tive in Congress from New Hampshire. Of his early local affini- 
ties we know nothing; but there was every reason to expect 
from him a valuable contribution to this historical discussion. His 
opening sentence is sonorous and impressive. " This [Fort Pop- 
ham] is hallowed ground." Why " hallowed ground ?" we would 
detain the Professor for a moment, meekly to inquire ; but he hur- 
ries on to other glittering generalities. Is this spot " hallowed 
ground," because a colony of convicted felons landed here m Au- 
gust 1607, more than half of whom deserted the next December, 
and all abandoned the spot the following Spring, leaving with the 
neio-hboring Indians the memory of the most shocking barbarities 
committed\ipon them ? (See Relations des Jesuites, 1858, tom. 
i p 36 ; Parkman's Pioneers of France, p. 266.) Was it because 
these sportive colonists enticed friendly Indians into this same 
Fort, under the pretense of trade ; and, causing them to take the 
dra-ropes of a loaded cannon, hred off the piece when the In- 
dians were in line, and blew them to atoms ? (See Williamson s 
Hist, of Maine, vol. i. p. 201.) " The lines of an eventful history, 
Mr Patterson goes on to say, " stretching through more than two 
centuries and a half, converge to this beautiful promontory of 
Sabino " We think not. Heaven spare the land from such 
a^dis-racc! Mr. Patterson devotes two pages to general 



assertions of similar import, and then brandies off into another 
subject having no relation to the historical question. Into this 
we do not propose to follow him. 

A curious feature in this pamphlet is an isolated Letter/ writ- 
ten by a respectable Boston gentleman, found in the Appendix. 
This alone, of the correspondence received by the Committee on 
Invitations, we are told, was found worthy of preservation. It 
was certainly not so much the name of the writer that rescued 
this letter from the oblivion of the waste-basket, common to its 
fellows, as the impresr^ion on the minds of the managers of the 
Celebration, that it contained historical information tending to 
confirm their theory. 

The letter-writer finds that the " works " of the colonists, 
during the few months they stopped at Sabino, " were far more 
important than their formal acts recorded." The distinction he 
would make between '' works " and " formal acts " is not quite 
apparent. Among the "works" he specifies, is "a vessel, the 
dimensions of which are unknown ; but fit to cross the ocean." 
Strachey tells us what we know about this vessel. He says it 
was " a pretty Pynnace of about some thirty tonne." Whether 
it was fit to cross the ocean, we will presently consider. The 
writer claims for this fishing-boat the honor of being " the pioneer 
ship built in North America." This claim is nothing new. Mr. 
John A. Poor made it in Popham Memorial, (page 73,) and other 
writers of less weight have repeated it. The real fact, however, 
is that a vessel was built in the harbor of Port Royal (now 
Hilton Head) forty -four years before this, by Huguenot colo- 
nists, in which a party of more than twenty crossed the ocean. 
But, leaving out of the account the Huguenot vessel, a similar 
pinnace had been built at Sabino before this. Strachey says, 
under the date of 28th of August: "Most of the hands labored 
hard about the fort, and the carpenters about the buylding of a 

1 This Letter is reprinted entire on page 10. 



sn^all pinnace, the president ov-seeing and pplyng ever^-e 
to his lorke." The other craft, called the " ^ .rgn. for -^™* 
the above pretensions are set .p, ^vas not fram d t U after 
Captain Dalies had sailed for England,- that ,s, after the 15th 

"' ThTlltwritcr further garnishes his theme by talhing ahoat 
thirBlh^Ws^afo voyage to .^^^^^^^^^^^ 

r::^::r;:reeCti::::,.^^^^^ 

letter. Their theory must be in a desperate condition to need 

^t: ,::"::! to say with regard to this vesseh Writers 
onXe^ England have generally stated that ^e de« eo^^ ■ 
nists took this craft with them. This, ';—■•', !;7J* 
from the statements made above, that she was "6 /» ""^ Jt 
ocean," that she made a "safe voyage to England .,c A P- 
of the company were not over anxious to re-v,sit then native 
land They had saved their necks once by emigrating, and were 
ott hasto'to put them again into the halter. With this " p^et y 
nvunacc" they could catch codfish, and cure them along shoie 
ba tT hem f r other commodities with some of the hundreds of 
uaiifci iirei" . fislipries on the coast; 

vessels from Europe employed in the fi^«"«^ °" 
harass the Indians ; and lead generally a wild and fee Me such 
as was congenial to their character and disposition. The ves 
sels, doubtless, left Sabino at the same time. ^ » " ' 
body of the colonists departed, it was necessary that all should 
Le- for they had so incurred the enmity of the Indians by 
t;: r Lrbarities, that any left behind would have eon murfe^d 
Strachey's account is entirely consistent with this. He sajs 
' r allvmbarquedin this new arrived ship [the 'Mary and 
John ■] and in the new pynnace, the Virginia, and sett saile for 
E tlald. And this was the end of that northerne colony uppou 
ti,e rLr Sachadehoc." Brief Relation, 1622, says, " they built a 
' etty barke of their owne, which served them a good purpose 
rising them in their returning." Certainly; but we do not 



9 

read that the " new pjnnace " arrived in England, and was there 
an object of admiration, as a specimen of naval architecture. 

The improbability that this '' pjnnace " was sea-worthy, and 
made a voyage across the Atlantic, will appear from the follow- 
ing considerations ; — 

1. There was not time between the 15th of December and 
Spring to build a sea-worthy vessel. There were but forty-five 
persons left in the colony, and this number was reduced before 
Spring by disease and squabbles with the Indians. There were 
probably not ten carpenters in the company. The Winter, we 
are told, was unseasonable and intensely severe. Strachey says, 
that, " after Capt. Davies's departure they fully finished the fort, 
trencht and fortified it with 12 pieces of ordnance, and built 50 
howses, besides a church and a storehouse," — sufficient work, we 
might suppose, to employ forty-five Old Bailey convicts till Spring, 
without building a sea-going vessel. If Strachey does not tell the 
truth in this matter, we know nothing at all about this vessel. 

2. They had no need of a sea-going vessel. These were fur- 
nished by the English undertakers. What they needed was a 
small craft in which to take fish along shore. The Huguenots 
built their vessel in 1563 to return home in; it being their only 
means of escaping starvation. There was no intention of aban- 
doning the Popham settlement till Capt. Davies returned in the 
Spring with the news that their patron saint. Sir John Popham, 
surnamed " the hangman," was dead. 

3. We know that the Popham colonists were knaves ; Init it 
is not necessary to infer that they were fools. Here was a good, 
stanch ship, the " Mary and John," of London, Captain Davies, 
master, about to sail for England. The whole company was 
now reduced to about forty souls. This same ship had brought 
over, a few months before, more than double that number. The 
graduates of penal institutions have usually as keen a regard for 
their corporal safety as other persons. Cowardice is commonly 
their ruling characteristic. Is it reasonable to suppose that any 

2 



10 

of that godless company would have risked their lives to a voy- 
age across the Atlantic in that "pretty pynnace," built of green 
pine, in midwinter, when they could have had safe and comfort- 
able quarters in the " Mary and John" ? If the intention, on the 
part of the manaeers, was to transport the colonists safely to 
Eno-land, there was no motive nor excuse for putting any on board 
the'new craft. If there was a willingness on the part of some ot 
the colonists to embark in it, they must, we think, have had some 
other project in view than a trip across the Atlantic. The asser- 
tion that the vessel made the voyage is purely gratuitous. 

P. 

[THE LETTER REFERRED TO ON PAGE 7.] 

Boston, Aug. 27, 18G5. 
My dear Sir, -Your invitation to be present at the Popham 
Celebration is at hand. The short notice will prevent me from 
beino- present to tnke part in the interesting ceremomes. ^^ltll- 
ont Issenting to all the claims made in your "Popham Memorial 
Volume," allow me to say, that I think those who have spoken or 
written on that subject have overlooked one of the most important 
results of that enterprise. In this practical age, we must look to 
what was really effected by the earliest colonists on these shores. 
Let us briefly try that at Sagadahoc by this test ; for, in my opin- 
ion, their works were far more important fhan the formal acts 
recorded. They certainly erected houses, a church, a fort ; and, 
lastly, a vessel, the dimensions of which are unknown, but fit to 
cross the ocean. Now we know, that, in a forest, it is not a diffi- 
cult thing to build log-houses, or a church and a fort in the same 
way ; but to construct a sea-going vessel is quite a different art a,r. 
This requires artisans who are used to such work ; and there can 
be no doubt, that among the colonists there were found a master- 
builder,! ^-ith the necessary journeymen and sawyers (for there 
were no mills,) a smith, and also several laborers : for the building 



r Strachey says, " the chief slup.risM -an one Digby, of London." Uc also speaks of 
' the carpenters."— Chap. x. 



11 

of a vessel in a remote wilderness would then require three times 
the amount of manual labor that would now eftect the same result — 
in these days when materials are so easily prepared, transported 
and fitted, by the aid of machinery. 

Looking, then, at what was certainlj- done by the Popham 
Colon}', we must allow that, during the short period they occupied 
the rugged peninsula of Sabino, and making due allowance for a 
hard winter, the destruction of their store-house, and the sickness 
that followed, they deserve credit for enterprise and industry in 
constructing a vessel fit to encounter the storms of the Atlantic, 
and make a safe voyage to England. There she must have 
attracted much attention, being the pioneer ship built in North 
America. When, therefore, we consider the value of Popham's 
enterprise, the building and voyage of the " Virginia of Sagada- 
hoc " is one of its most important results. It was not equalled by 
the Plymouth colony in the first ten years of its existence ; and it 
was not till the third year of the existence of its powerful neighbor 
of "Massachusetts Bay," that a ship, fit to cross the ocean, was 
constructed. 

Wishing you a pleasant day and a numerous company, I am, 

Yours truly, 

FREDERIC KIDDER. 

To Rev. Edwai:d Ballard, Secrrtary, &c. 



[Boston Daily Advertiser, Ajml 21, 1866.] 

"THE LAST POPHAM ADDRESS." 

To the Editors of the Boston Daily Advertiser : — 

By the courtesy of some unknown friend, I have received your 
paper of the 11th inst., containing a notice of Prof. Patterson's 
Address at the last Celebration at Fort Popham. As it presents 
some matters needing amendment, I trust your greater courtesy 
will allow space in your columns for a few observations. 

Your correspondent has confessed a partiality for the litera- 



12 

ture growing out of the first colonial occupation of the soil of 
New England under English enterprise ; and forthw^ith, in a style 
of pleasantry, bearing with it the edge of ridicule, speaks of the 
efforts of its writers as scarcely better than advocates indulging 
in " historical waggery," wdiose pages " we read," as in other 
fiction, " to be amused." 

But without attempting to reply with smiles alone to such 
attempts at smiling away the force of historic verities, it is per- 
tinent to say, that when your correspondent speaks of the " false 
theory " of the believers in the Popham Colony, it would have 
been quite as lucid a mode of treatment, if he had stated the 
" theory " itself. TVe had supposed that we were dealing with 
facts ; and were not responsible for any deductions drawn there- 
from, either by affection or prejudice. And the facts, though 
prominent, may be comprised in a short enumeration : That in 
1607 an English colony, under President George Popham, was 
founded at the mouth of the Kennebec ; — w^as inaugurated and 
continued with the sacred services of the Christian religion ; — 
was an actual possession of the region afterwards known as New 
England, under a Royal Charter never denied nor abrogated ; — 
and, though intended, as the documents show, to be perpetual, it 
came to an end withia a year, by reason of the death of its two 
chief supporters; — and w^as followed by a succession of occu- 
pancies, that proved title, as against the former and never-re- 
newed claims of France. 

Now, if these facts make the " extraordinary theory," which 
your correspondent has not ventured to describe, we are ready 
to take it in all its dimensions, and furnish your readers the 
proofs, as readily as you will grant your columns. But we are 
not inclined to shut our mouths, or stop our pens, by the terror 
of any such words as " false and extraordinary theory," " empty 
assertion and vapid declamation." We do not ask "' Plymouth 
and Massachusetts Bay gracefully to yield the honors of their 
exalted position," any farther than " the stern logic of truth " 



13 

may demand ; and we shall not be unwilling to say, that the 
claims of history are worthy of respect, even among the present 
dwellers in those ancient and time-honored colonies. As to the 
remark about "-'the Church Colony' of Sagadahoc," that may 
pass as a piece of pleasantry, though it was a fact. 

The question is asked, in regard to the opening sentence of 
Mr. Patterson's Address, " Why is this hallowed ground ? " We 
had supposed, that any place where religion had held its services 
continuously, and in connection with important events, might 
properly bear such a designation. The orator evidently thought 
so ; and his very large audience, out of the thousands assembled 
on that day, did not once think of a criticism upon the expres- 
sion. But the question seems to have been proposed, not so 
much for disputing the religious associations connected with the 
undertaking, as to bring in two cliarges against the colonists, of 
no force whatever against the great purposes of the settlement. 

The Jirsi charge is, that " a colony of convicted felons landed 
here in 1607." Now who believes this? We who live in the 
valley of the Kennebec have always supposed, that faith is belief 
founded on evidence ; and that all other demands on faith, if 
answered, are credulity. What is the evidence that the charge 
is true ? Not a particle. The only pretence of proof is the 
casual remark of Sir William Alexander, who says of these 
colonists, — of course he means the laboring part of their num- 
ber, and not the ten in authority, — that they went to these 
western shores, " as endangered by the law, or their own necessi- 
ties." But was there no other law than that against social 
crime ? Contemporaneous history shows that their endanger- 
ment proceeded from the statutes against vagrancy. At that 
time, in consequence of the state of the country, a poor n)an 
could hardly avoid their grasp. Surely poverty was no crime. 
Gorges sought persons of this necessitous class to aid in carry- 

1 Briefe Narration, Cliap. ii. 



14 

d^w He« fl*5 - _^ ^^ ^^ ,j^, ^ 

better it <rf ^^««^ 

*^.^^'.^!^~ >ft <;*T^ That, when tJun xretv 

: be K-K^l-ei^d, the w«K>s ivf >d»k-h tlK y ^^^^^ 

e«.xietc^ ^^ d«eflr poBtk^ The rv ^.X 

= , r. n^ sconi of the klwu^ popttl*- 

^^'^^ ~ ^ .iitschai^cter;'^ IfthoTvkul 

t^ aBT ecmrkts in tiie Keiii^^ Colony, It J 
^frc«ailiisaec — - :-^-^^^^„ 

. av* Aew «s BO transportsnion of any olas^ 
of the <nian^ nU 1619 « Th«efon.- d«r. -««. no«o to Sxgaaa- 
W «d ^r *. . ■ a«d letter tx>,.^™ .!«« 1»* *<»^- 

.J _ . , , ; bivn shoini ivquiring t»n#twm- 

^r^ a - n« for m««l a«ilt Aims the time of tho 

^ oo«ld not be a««.po"od without . fe- A»> *'^-^ 
Wore. =.^ alHwt 4e felons of ,he «W. i. in.nmon.h- bn..,H,t 
asainst the memory of U.e helpless dead. 

The «««J eharae eomes from the cannon slory: that ilK 
„en at the fort todueed tl.e Indians to ...an the d™^■v,«,H>^ 
and to stand in the li..e of dirxvtion of the pi.ve a.nuxl or ex. 
ention; and then fltx^ oft the pi«e upon the xvhole IhhIv of 



15 

tlic imfortuiiatcs, when thus "in lino, and l»lc\v thcni (o atoms." 
This is a tak^ of Avoe rather tougher than the (juoted AVillianisoti 
gives it. — who is inelined to discredit it. But is even William- 
son's reluctant aeeount true? 

The best reply to this allegation of horror is to be found in 
the narrative of the Jesuits, in 1611, who went to the Kennebec 
by the inland passage, in quest of corn. The Indians met Ihem. 
They gave them an account of their Ireatuieut of the colonists, 
whom they represented as having been defeated by them. They 
'•llattered" the French, saying that "they loved them well;'" and, 
to gain tlieir favor, told them hoAV the English drove them from 
their doors and tables with clubs, and made their dogs bite tliem. 
All this might have been done for jU'otcH'tion. und(M' a renewal of 
the hostile attitude assumed by the natives on Gilbert's trip up 
the Androscoggin. The French were good listeners to any 
charge against English Protestants. Now, if this story about 
the cannon had been as true as its reality would have been cruel, 
why should not these Indians have told its barbarities to such 
good auditors ? A cannon ball, with the explosion from the 
muzzle, Avonld have nuide a more damaging narrative than a club 
or a dou'-bite. Yet no svllable of the great event is recorded 
while the little ones are faithfully chronicled to the disparagement 
of the Protestants. It is doubtful whether any cruelties did occur 
so utterly at variance with the known kind treatment of them by 
the '• worthy '' President. For the Jesuits say of these Indians, 
that they were " flatterers," and " the greatest speech-makers 
(/larangi/ci/rs) in the world." When they had encouraged their 
visitors {/loiilcd them, cmmieloijent) with promises of grain, they 
put them oil" by trucking in beaver.^ Such witnesses do not 
auunmt to much; and. if ^Ir. Parkman uses the language of your 
correspondent in calling these uncertain incidents " the most 

1 Fuller information, g.iined from the military letters of Biard and Masse, shows that 
the troatmont referred to was connected with an occupation of tlic same location, by the 
Knglish, in the year ii/ter t!ie Popluun Colony had departed. — Reports, edited by Carayon. 



16 



shocking baAavities," it nnght be well wished that ^o able a,,d 
interest^, a historian as he, had given the bnet narra . e itself, 
.,.„,.„ ,i,„„ry " from ts statements, 
rather than to have derived such a theoiy 
Were there no "shocking barbarities" elsewhere against the 

natives ? „/i_ •„ 

The first known utterance of this cannon story was made m 
Massachusetts, about seventy years after its asserted occnn-ence. 
A few words may be allowed as to the letter in the Appen- 
dix, which comes in for a large share of notice. It is intimated 
tha; other letters were not worthy of preservation. Ihe reason 
why they were not printed was because they wore notes of c^ui- 
tesy to the Committee, not needing public expression. Mr. Kid- 
lei's letter was thought to have a historical value, as illustrating 
the skillful and industrious abilities of the colonists; and is e e- 
tainly proved to be of some importauce, or it would not have le- 
ceived so much attention. i;,,;„Minn 

The first criticism is verbal, on the non-apparent distinction 
between "works" and "formal acts recorded." To us who 
have drank water, if not inspiration, from the sm...s^ni?ov. 
ham well, beneath tlie shadow of gabino Head, it appears th 
.. formal acts recorded," were the acts of taking possession with 
chartered rights, placed on the minutes by « John fecamnion, Sec 
ret V" The "works" were the daily toils of the laborers 
in tr-enching, fortifying, building the storehouse and church and 

the " nrcttv pvnnacc." „ , 

tiie piciij i.> „resentinf the fact of a 

We thank your correspondent lor presenilis 

French vessel built at Port Royal forty years before any naval 

architecture was attempted at Sabino. AVe h.ave been so much 

e habit of thinki„g of English colonization, «-» P-'-P^\- 

Ive had too narrow a horizon. But, better taugh hereafter 

;, „il, be careful to put the patrial adjective as the proper 

;:recessor, and say "the EngUsk ' pioneer ship,' and so again 

"Ttolllr " pynnace," built before this one claimed as the 



17 

firstj wc arc also glad to be assured of the fact for the first time. 
We had supposed that the two mentions, made in the Popham 
journal as given by Strachey, related to the one vessel, — in 
another writer called a " pretty bark." ^ But, if there were two, so 
much the better for Mr, Kidder's illusti-ation touching the 
skill and energy of the colonists. Strachey says, they all em- 
barked in the ship that arrived with supplies from England, 
" and in the new pynnace, the ' Virginia,' and set sail for 
England." This word all, used also by Gorges and Ogilb}', 
and its equivalent by a contemporaneous writer, forbids utterly 
the statement of your correspondent, that a considerable portion 
of the colonists took the other ''pynnace" — which we cannot yet 
see was built — to fish, and '' lead generally a wild and free life." 

It is also intimated that the "Virginia" did not reach England. 
But the " Briefc Relation," 1622, gives as much information about 
its arrival in England as about the arrival of the ship. A fair 
hearing of the old writer is enough to show that both reached 
the expected haven ; and, doubtless, the tirst English vessel built 
in these wild regions did awaken curiosity in the beholders at 
home. But this may be '' theory." 

As to the improbability of the building of this vessel in the 
time allowed, and in the unusually cold winter, with the few 
men, it is enough to reply, that the " Briefc Relation " says this : 
" Having in the time of their abode there (notwithstanding the 
coldness of the season, and the small help they had,) built a 
pretty bark of their own, which served them to good purpose, as 
easing them [i. e. in the other vessel] in their returning." 

The application of the term "hangman " is made to the Chief 
Justice Popham. But it is not easy to see what connection it has 
with the purpose of the colony. If the laws of the land required 
criminals to be hung, he cannot be blamed for their adminis- 
tration. Sad indeed will it be for magistrates, if they are lo be 
thus designated because they execute the laws. It would not be 

1 Briefe Relation. 



18 



among the earliest, if not the very fi.»t, of ^^^^^^^ 



dead.'" 



[rorllosil Adeirllter, Jprit 26, iscaj.] 

uTHE LAST I'OPHAM ADDEESS." 
Under the above caption there was printed in the Bo.<» 

rrrtf t.r tlXdred and .t.ei.hth Anniversary of 
the Planting of the Popham Colony, at Sagadahoc. 

.V!i „ first readin- of this somewhat enrious review, I sup- 
posed twt-Untended to throw ridicule on the Popha. 
Srlns, and all concerned in ^, hnt, on a c.ser pe^sal, 

ti::rt:t:::h::^-^--;-^::r^^^^^^^^^^ 

and all that has been written about them, bj the 

"Hrcolences his theme by ridiculing the ^^ Popham Memo 
riaf he "vindication of Gorges," and some other pubhc.- 
's • but without attempting to reply to any part of t em. H 
Z'L on to tell us that Mr. Patterson is a scho ar, ha» 
Z : Professor at Dartmouth College, and is -^^ a >Iem er 
r ron^ress • and then commences his onslaught by statmg, that 
on S a so '(S bino) a colony of convicted criminals landed .n 
160 more than half of whom deserted the next December, and 
,e reminder left the next spring, after comm.ttmg the mo t 
^Xrlarities on the Indians; and refers to Wilhamson s 



19 

History of Maine, and Parkman's Pioneers, — neither of which 
authorities justify any such statement ; and, although trying to 
ridicule some of Professor Patterson's sentiments, charges him 
with branching off into a subject that has no relation to the 
question at all. 

Leaving the thirty odd pages of the Address without any 
remarks, he attacks a letter, written as a reply to an invitation 
to be present on that occasion, in which the writer notices the 
building of a ship by the colonists, as a fact of some importance, 
which, all the writers on that expedition say, took part of the 
colonists to England. But let us follow him through his many 
wild and unsupported assertions relating to that vessel. And 
here it may be proper to say, that the letter does not endorse 
the authors of the Popham Memorial, or any part of their theory, 
but at the outset expresses a dissent to many of the claims made 
by those writers, and refers almost entirely to the ship and its 
history. This reviewer, after some grand denunciations, finally 
concentrates his arguments into three stately propositions. 

First, that the vessel never was built, because there was not 
time, and also that there was not over ten carpenters, or forty 
personS; in all the colony to do it, — while we know that since 
that day vessels of five times her size have been built with 
half that force, and in much less time, in that immediate vicinity. 
Second, that there was no need of a vessel ; and third, that she 
was built of green pine, and no one would wish himself in her; 
and so the idea that she made the voyage is absurd. Now this 
is exactly the famous kettle argument over again, with results 
just as conclusive. 

In reply to these three formal propositions, it is only necessary 
to say, that the fact of the building of the vessel rests on as good 
authority as any historical statement relating to that colony; 
that there were sufficient men and full time to do it in ; and that 
there can be no doubt it was intended to build a ship when the 
expedition left England, from the fact that they brought out a 



20 

master ship-builder and workmen. That she was built of " green 
pine " is an assumption very improbable, when we know that the 
growth along that shore was mainly hard wood, while pine pre- 
dominates in the interior. But his most severe tirades are 
poured out upon the poor colonists, calling them felons, knaves, 
cowards, and almost exhausting the vocabulary of Billingsgate. 
To this I will not attempt to reply, but merely remark, that his 
language, style and logic, is as far removed from the " pure well 
of English undofiled " as a pool of stagnant water is from a 
perennial fountain. 

A passing reader of his famous review would be at a loss to 
understand why this ten-ible onset is made on this small pam- 
phlet, — nine-tenths of which he says does not refer to the Popham 
subject at all, — as though he expected to conquer them. Chinese- 
like, by only making a great noise. But a friend at my elbow 
savs that this is a broadside in advance, or, rather, the fire of his 
skirmish line, and only preparatory to the advance of liis big 
guns, which are to come in the shape of a preface to a reprint, 
in which he intended to entirely annihilate the Pophams, the 
Gorges, all their followers and biographers, great and small, rich 
and poor, so completely that our histories will have to be re- 
written, and these old names that have been so prominent in our 
early annals obliterated entirely ; and finally to destroy the gran- 
ite walls of Fort Popham, memorial stone and all, and by further 
displays of his cut-and-thrust logic prove conclusively that it is 
all a myth, and nothing of the kind ever existed. Nous verrons. 

Orient. 



I Boston Daili/ Advei'tiser, May 31, 1866.] 

POPHAM AGAIN AND FINALLY. 

Our notice of Professor Patterson's Address, in the Advertiser 
of the 11th of April, has drawn from "Sabino" an extended 



21 

reply, which appeared ten days later. As our object in noticing 
the Address was not controversy ; and as " Sabino," skirmishing 
here and there, has made no effective attack on any historical 
position taken in the criticism, we have doubted the propriety 
of making a rejoinder. The world is not in haste to become 
Pophamized. The memories and associations of more than two 
centuries, grounded on historic truth, are not to be pushed aside 
by the most absurd and baseless theory ever addressed to the 
human understanding. 

" Sabino " has done us the honor of acknowledging, that we 
have contributed to this discussion some historical facts that had 
not before fallen under his notice, and he thanks us for the 
same. The most courteous acknowledgment we can make is, 
confessedly, a rejoinder. We shall therefore examine somewhat 
minutely several of the positions taken by our Eastern friend, 
hoping still to deserve his kind eulogium, by contributing other 
facts that may not have come within his observation. 

We feel especially favored in having, as a disputant in this dis- 
cussion, no amateur nor journeyman Pophamite ; but the mas- 
ter-workman, the original inventor and patentee, tlie Magnus 
Apollo of the theory ; he who compiled the " Memorial Volume ; " 
who arranges annually those agreeable junketings, in midsum- 
mer, at Sabino Head ; who is perpetual manager of the controversy 
and overseer of the press for all Popham publications. He kindly 
informs us (for no one knows so well as himself) why Mr. Kid- 
der's letter was printed, confirming the impression expressed 
in our notice. Every fact and inference, favoring liis side of the 
question that " Sabino " is not master of, is not worth knowing. 

It is unfortunate that one so profound in Pophamistic lore 
should not express his ideas in clear and idiomatic English. 
Some of his sentences, after careful study, we confess our inabil- 
ity to understand ; and he often makes use of words out of their 
ordinary meaning. For instance, he says, " We who live in the 
valley of the Kennebec have always supposed, that faith is 



22 

belief founded in evidence ; and that all other demands on faith, 
if answered, are credulity." How demaiids on faith can in any 
event be credulity, is to us as obscure as the metaphysical 
nomenclature in vogue in the valley of the Kennebec. Faith is 
defined by the best lexicographer of the language as '•' the assent 
of the mind to the truth of what is declared by another, resting 
on his authority or veracity, without other evidence." We, at 
the Bay, accept an older definition, running after this fashion : 
" Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evi- 
dence of things not seen." We apprehend that if there is, in 
the valley of the Kennebec, any faith in the Popham theory, 
other than that held by our clerical friend and his copartners, it 
is grounded solely on the assertion of " Sabino & Co.," (the 
corporate style of the firm is the Maine Historical Society,) as 
something to be hoped for, but the evidence for which is not seen. 

" Sabino," on the other hand, objects to our style, as not 
appropriate for a grave historical discussion. He is shocked 
that we should speak of his theorizing as " historical waggery, 
which we read, as we do other fiction, to be amused." Style, 
after all, is greatly a matter of taste, for which there is no ac- 
counting. We arc now, however, to deal with History ; and we 
promise our friend that our style shall be as rigid and matter-of- 
fact as he can desire. 

"Sabino" complained that we commented on the Popham 
theory without " stating the theory itself." Our notice was 
written to be read only by those who are conversant with the 
historical discussions of the day, not one of whom, probably, is 
ignorant of what he and his Society have been doing and printing 
for the past four years. He supplied what he deemed an omis- 
sion in our notice. We copy his carefully-prepared statement 
in full, and insert numerals, for convenience in its examination : — 

"That in 1607 an English colon}-, under President Geoi-ge 
Popham, was founded (1) at the mouth of the Kennebec; — was 
inaugurated and continued with the sacred service of the Christian 



23 

religion (2) ; — was in actnal possession of the region after- 
wards known as New England (3), under a royal charter never 
denied nor abrogated (4) ; — and, though intended, as the docu- 
ments show, to be perpetual, it came to an end within a year, 
by reason of the death of its two chief supporters (5) ; — and was 
followed by a succession of occupancies, that proved title, as 
against the former and never-renewed claims of France " (6). 

" These facts," " Sabino " says, " we are ready to take in all 
their dimensions." " These facts," we, on the other hand, propose 
to submit to a critical examination. 

1. Was an English colony founded at the mouth of the Ken- 
nebec in 1607 ? An attempt was made then and there to found 
such a colony ; but the speedy result of the experiment was a 
disgraceful failure, and proved a warning to all future underta- 
kers. This M^arning comes to us in the inimitable wi'itings of 
Lord Bacon. His lordship was personally conversant with the 
circumstances ; and to him Strachey dedicates his " Historic of 
Travaile," which contains the best contemporaneous account we 
have of the aflfair. We quote from the first complete edition of 
Lord Bacon's Essays, 1625, p. 199 : — 

" It is a Shamefull and Vnbleffed Thing, to take the Scumme of 
People, and Wicked, Condemned Men, to be the People with whom 
you Plant : And not only fo, but it fpoileth the Plantation ; For 
they will euer Hue like Rogues, and not fall to worke, but be Lazie, 
and doe Mifchief, and fpend Victuals, and quickly weaiy, and then 
Certifie ouer to their Country to the Difcredit of the Plantation." 

" Sabino " shuns the usual expression " planted " for the more 
pretentious " founded," as if the afl'air was a reality, and had a 
foundation. A thing may be planted, and that be the end of it. 
If the seed be bad, it rots in the hill. Such was the fact, and 
fate of the Popham Colony. 

2. The religious history of the Popham Colony is the briefest 
narrative of the kind on record. All that is known of it may 



24 

be comprised in one sentence. A sermon was preached on two 
occasions ; and some Indians were taken on a Sunday to the 
" place of public prayer," when they listened " with great rever- 
ence and silence." This conduct was highly commendable in 
the Indians ; and, if the colonists, " the wicked, condemned men," 
had behaved as well, something, after all, might have come of 
the enterprise. 

3. How much of '• the region afterwards known as New 
England" was this Colony " in actual possession of"? A few 
acres of ground on the Promontory of Sabino, where they in- 
trenched themselves, and nothing more ! Fi'oni this narrow 
foothold they were driven, on one occasion, by the Indians, who 
took possession of their Fort, their stock of provisions and mili- 
tary stores. Not understanding the nature of gunpowder, tlie 
Indians blew themselves up ; and the survivors — regarding the 
explosion as an expression of disapproval on the part of the Great 
Spirit for their rudeness in driving, with arrows and clubs, 
forty-five Englishmen out of a Fort that was trenched, and 
mounted twelve pieces of ordnance — restored the premises to 
its gallant defenders, and proposed henceforth to live on terms 
of friendship. (See Williamson's History of Maine, i. p. 200.) 
Why does " Sabino " limit their possessions to New England ? 
Why not give them North America, and the whole Western 
Continent ? 

4. The Popham theorists maintain, that King James's North 
Virginia Charter of 160G had some special virtue as a barrier to 
French supremacy in New England. Both nations claimed the 
whole territory ; — the English on the ground of Cabot's discov- 
ery, and of Gilbert's taking formal possession in 1583; and the 
French on the ground of prior settlement. The question of su- 
premacy was to be determined by permanent occupancy, by 
enterprise, and by valor in arms ; not by royal proclamations 
and charters. No royal charter to a trading company could 
strengthen the title England already possessed by right of 



25 

discovery and former occupation. The Plymouth Colony landed 
in New England without a charter, and the event will never be 
the less significant on that account. 

5. The Popham Colony "came to an end within a year, by 
reason of the death of its two chief supporters." Did it ever 
occur to " Sabino," that his Colony must have had a very slender 
foundation to have fallen in ruins at the death of two, out of a 
hundred and twenty, persons engaged in it? The Plymouth 
Colony lost by death, in four months after the landing, fifty-one 
out of one hundred and two, and still the Colony lived. We 
neither accept nor deny "Sabino's" statement as to the cause by 
which his Colony came to its end. Mourners, in doubtful cases, 
should be allowed to settle these questions for themselves. It 
was a case of complicated diseases, any one of which would 
have resulted in dissolution. Sworn testimony and a coroner's 
jury would be necessary to determine the approximate cause. 
The first question before such a tribunal would be whether the 
patient could be said to have ever lived. Waiving this point, we 
should, if pressed for a verdict, give — "Died by visitation of 
the Almighty." 

Who were the two persons whose lives were so intimately en- 
twined with that of the Colony ? They were George Popham, 
who came over as president, and his brother. Sir John Popham, 
who never came over — both very aged persons. Sir Ferdinando 
Gorges, who was " interested in all these misfortunes," and knew 
more of the end of the Colony than any other person whose writ- 
ings have come down to us, did not regard the president's death 
as a matter of importance. He says, his death " was not so 
strange, in that he was well stricken in years hefore he went, 
and had long been an infirme man" (Briefe Narration, p. 10). 
Raleigh Gilbert, a younger and more energetic man, " a man," 
says Gorges, " worthy to be beloved of them all for his industry," 
was forthwith appointed president ) and the change was rather a 
4 



26 

benefit, than otherwise, to the Colony, if anything could benefit 
what was in artiado mortis. 

The death of Sir John Popham was a more serious matter. 
He was the head and front of the enterprise ; the brother was 
only his agent. It was Sir John's Colony. He furnished the 
bulk of the capital, provided the colonists, gave liis name and 
his own personal infamy to ihe undertaking. Who, then, was 
Sir John Popham? He was Lord Chief Justice of England, 
and was seventy-six years of age. In his youth he had been a 
highwayman, and probably a garroter. "He frequently sallied 
forth at night from a hostel in Southwark, with a band of despe- 
rate characters, and, planting tbemselves in ambush on Shooter's 
Hill, or taking other positions favorable for attack and escape, 
they stopped travelers and took from them not only their money, 
but any valuable commodities which they carried with them. 
The extraordinary and almost incredible circumstance is, that 
Popham is supposed to have continued in these courses after he 
had been called to the bar, and when, being of mature age, he 
was married to a respectable woman." (Lord Campbell's Lives 
of the Chief Justices, 1849-57, i. p. 210.) Lord Campbell 
was not the man to speak unadvisedly of one who had occupied 
the highest judicial office, save one, in England. " Popham's 
portrait," he says, " represented him as ' a huge, heavy, ugly man,' 
and I am afraid he would not appear to great advantage in a 
sketch of his moral qualities, which, lest I should do him injus- 
tice I will not attempt." — Idem, p. 229. 

With regard to his law reports. Lord Campbell says " they 
are wretchedly ill done, and they are not considered of authority. 
We should have been better pleased if he had given us an account 
of his exploits when he was chief of a band of freebooters." 
(p. 229.) "The reproach urged against him was extreme se- 
verity to prisoners. He was notorious as a ' hanging judge.' 
Not only was he keen to convict in cases prosecuted by the 
government ; but in ordinary larcenies, and above all in highway 



27 

robberies, there was little chance of an acquittal before liim." 
— Idem, p. 219. 

" lie left behind him the greatest estate that had ever been 
amassed hj any lawyer. Some said as much as £10,000 a year; 
but it is not supposed to be all honestly come by; and he is 
reported even to have begun to save money when ' the road did 
him justice.'" — Idem, p. 229. 

His other biographers, Fuller, Aubrey, Lloyd, Wood and Foss, 
paint his character in similar colors. They allude to, and several 
of them state at large, the shocking details of the manner in 
which he came into possession of Littlecote Hall, his estate 
in Wiltshire, It}' compounding with felony. Foss, tlie latest 
biographer of the Judges of England, who is disposed to soften 
the hard places in Popham's record, mentions this dark story, 
and says, (vi. pp. 188-84,) "It is extraordinary that no refu- 
tation should have been attempted ; for, if any existed, it is to 
be presumed tliat such a writer as Sir Walter Scott, while de- 
tailing tlie charge [in Rokel\v] would have noticed the answer." 
The " horrible and mysterious crime " alluded to by Macaulay 
(Hist, of Eng., ii. p. 542) refers to tliis affair. Here is the man, 
who — the Maine Historical Society would have us believe — 
planted civilization on this continent. Let us see how he did it. 

His position as Chief Justice gave him a controlling influence 
in all the jails and penitentiaries in the realm. Aubrey (Letters, 
iii. p. 495) says "he stockt or planted [Northern] Virginia out 
of all the gaoles of England " Wood's Athena? Oxonienses 
(Bliss's ed. ii. p. 22) says, "he was the first person who invented 
the plan of sending convicts to the plantations." The statement 
should have been limited to Englishmen; for the French had 
practised this mode of colonization many years before. Cartier 
in 1547, La Roche in 1598, and De Monies in 1604, all used 
this material for colonists. The permission which the King of 
France gave Cartier to ransack the jails of Paris may be found 
in Hazard, i. p. 21. Any sort of criminals he could take, 



28 

except those convicted of treason, or counterfeiting the King's 
currency. 

Thomas Fuller (Worthies of England, ii. p. 284) says "his 
[Popham's] justice was exemplary on Theeves and Robbers." 
Wood quotes this passage, adding, " whose wayes and courses 
he well understood when he was a young man," and counects it 
with the fact of his sending convicts to the plantations. Fuller, 
in his essay on Plantations, in "Holy and Profane States," 1642, 
says : " If the planters be such as leap thither from the gallows, 
can any hope for cream out of scum, when men send, as I may 
say. Christian savages to heathen savages ? It is rather bitterly 
than falsely spokeu concerning one of our Western plantations, 
consisting of most dissolute people, that it was very like unto 
England, as being spit out of the very mouth of it." David 
Lloyd (State Worthies, 1766, ii. p. 46) gives a sketch of Chief 
Justice Popham, in which, quoting the words of Fuller, already 
cited, he goes on to say : " neither did he only punish malefac- 
tors, but provide for them. He first set up the discovery of 
New England to maintain and employ those tliat could not live 
honestly in the Old." Lloyd also, in this connection, quotes the 
passage we have cited from Lord Bacon (p. 23), showing that it 
was understood by the old English historians as applying to the 
Popham Colony. 

The authorities seem to be conclusive as to the character of 
the colonists sent to Sagadahoc, the person by whom, and the 
manner in which, they were " prepared ;" — for that is the ex- 
pression Strachey uses (p. 163) with regard to these very colon- 
ists. Popham had sent out the year before (1606) a colony of 
one hundred persons destined to the same place. The ship was 
captured by the Spaniards, and the persons taken to Spain, and 
" made slaves in their gallions." The loss of the ship and outfit 
was suitably lamented; but not one word of sympathy was ex- 
pressed by the old writers for the persons enslaved by the Span- 
iards ; nor did Popham, so far as we know, make any attempt to 



29 

rescue them from their hard fate ; but he forthwith '•' prepared a 
greater number of planters," — that is, the one hundred and 
twenty persons who afterwards landed at Sabino. If it is pre- 
tended that the first company were honest, worthy men, the as- 
sumption carries with it the necessary inference that Popham 
was a heartless wretch ; but, assuming that they also were crimi- 
nals, it was natural that he should leave them to their fate. 

The death of Popham, on the 10th of June, 1607, — only eleven 
days after the Popham colonists sailed ^ — was of course fatal 
to the original plan of the undertaking. There was no authority 
left to " prepare " convicts, — colonists, we mean. A criminal 
colony needs constant recuperation. Seventy-five of the hun- 
dred and twenty abandoned the colony before the end of four 
months. Why they returned to England on the first opportunity 
that oifered, is not recorded. As they were the majority, they 
probably entered into a conspiracy, and deserted ; or they be- 
haved so badly, tliat the managers were glad to be rid of them, 
expecting that the Chief Justice would " prepare " others. But 
his Lordship was dead, though they knew it not ; and with him 
died all hopes of continuing the enterprise. The good ship 
" Mary and John " returned in the spring with provisions, but 
with no recruits ; and wound up the concern, by taking back to 
England the managers, and such of the wretched culprits as 
wished to return. 

Perhaps we may as well notice here, as in another place, the 
only evidence " Sabino " brings forward to show that the Saga- 
dahoc colonists were not convicted criminals, only convicted 
vagabonds and political offenders. It is this : " Chalmers says 
there was no transportation of any class of the guilty till 1619. 
Therefore there was none to Sagadahoc." Chalmers, we beg 
to submit, is not an original authority. He died only about 

1 For the date of Popham's death, we have followed Foss rather than CampbeU. The 
latter fixes the date as June 1, 1607, only one day after the colonists sailed. Campbell has 
fallen into a mistake in making Fopham's age seventy-two ; for Campbell himself, and the 
other authorities, give the date of his birth as 1531. 



50 



;ao ia iint " Sabino " should quote 
fnrtv vears aso ; and our surpnss is that . aoiuu 
l^ifL f;=J of t„e oW wHte. C^a.^e.-s l.d^o .^a„ 

!::rMr: :; t^c:: « as ... . .„ow .. na„e 

rrrt;;:\r":\,ol.*staUe„ta. -.SaMno- a«H.„tes 
rHosapsinn..yt.,att,,opo,ioyofse„aio.co„™^^^^^^^^ 
,„„,tion, ori.'inatcd with King James; ami, tliat m t lie j ear 

^: ;,„.; Colony." Will "Sabino" please pou. o« t 
llaw " under wl.iel. James seat o£f one ''"-"«\-""= ^^ " ^\^ 
that did not exist in 1G06 ? It seems never to have oeeuued to 
.Wo hat, under the in.pulse of avariee, or baser uu^t.ves 

,.ptnrn to the examination of "Sabino's " theory. 

W eonfess our inability to understand the eoneludmg 
e,le f " Sabino's " statement. The Popham CCony '■ was fol- 
wcd by a sueeession of oeeupaneies that proved t.tle fc 
^ . ,-? There was no later occupancy of New 

What occupane.es, prav? The.e was no F 

Fn..land till the Pilgrims arr.ved ... 1G20. JNo „en f 

^ni: would, for an instant, adn.it that .1.0 P .y™;""' ^o o..y 
Tad any relation to E..«iish supren.acy in New t..gla,.d. Re- 



31 

garded as a political event the Pilgrim settlement was not of the 
slightest consequence or importance." (Mr. John A. Poor's Vin- 
dication of Gorges, p. 72). Tlie next event in New England 
history was the occupancy of Massachusetts Bay. He cannot 
allude to this. " Puritan " is a more distasteful word to the Maine 
theorists than "Pilgrim." Besides, Puritan and Pilgrim have no 
relation to, or connection with, Popham. We are evidently drift- 
ing away from the true interpretation, and for the present must 
remain in blissful ignorance of the full meaning of this Delphic 
utterance. 

The general intent of "Sabino" is not obscure. He would 
have his readers understand that the Popham affair led to some- 
thing that was favorable to English supremacy. This we denv, 
and for proof, again appeal to the record. Can "Sabino" name 
one of the Popham men that ever took part in, or encouraged, 
any subsequent settlement ? Does he not know that they circu- 
lated the most unfavorable reports of the country, and prevented 
for many years any attempt to occupy New England ? Judge 
Sullivan (History of District of Maine, p. 53) says, "The suffer- 
ings of this [Popham] party, and the disagreeable account which 
they were obliged to give to excuse their own conduct, discour- 
aged any further attempts by the English." Brief Relation, 1G22, 
(in Purchas, iv. p. 1826,) says, "The arrival of these [Popham] 
people in England was a wonderful discouragement to all the 
first undertakers, insomuch as there was no more speech of set- 
ting any more Plantations in those parts for a long time after." 
Gorges, (Briefe Narration, p. 10) speaking of the return of the 
Popham colonists, says, " by which means all our former hopes 
were frozen to death." Among his misfortunes, which he goes on 
to enumerate, — for he was a large holder of Popham stock, — 
was that the country was " wholly given over by the body of 
the adventurers, as also that it self was branded by the returne 
of the Plantation as being over cold, and in respect to that, not 
habitable by our Nation." This statement he must have had 



32 

from the principal men of ilie Colony, and shows that thcv were 
as destitute of veracity, as the main body of the colonists were 
wanting in the cardinal virtues enjoined in the Decalogue. As- 
suming Strachey's account to be correct, we know that the winter 
of 1607-8, on the coast of Maine, could not have been severe for 
that locality, whatever the season was in Europe. After the loth 
of December, they finished trenching the fort, which shows that 
there was little or no frost in the ground. The amount of work 
also performed in the winter would have been absolutely impos- 
sible in a severe season. Gorges thus expressed his disbelief in 
the reports he received, as to the severity of the weather : " I 
have had too much experience in the World to be fi-ighted with 
such a blast." 

Sir William Alexander, Earl of Stirling, the patentee of Nova 
Scotia, (Description of New England, 1630, p. 30) thus describes 
what the Popham Colony did for English supremacy in New 
England : — 

" Thofe that went thither, being preffed to that enterprize, as en- 
dangered by the Law, or their own neceffities, (no enforced thing 
prouing pleafant, difcontented perfons fuffering while they act 
can feldom haue good fucceffe, and neuer fatiffaction) they after a 
^Vinter ftay dreaming of new hopes at home returned backe with the 
firft occafion, and to iuftify the fuddenneffe of their returne, they did 
coyne many excufes, burdening the bounds where they had beene 
with all the afperfions that poffibly they could deuife, feeking by that 
meanes to difcourage all others." 

" Our people abandoning the plantation," says "Brief Relation," 
(Purchas, iv. p. 1828) "in this sort as you have heard, the 
Frenchmen immediately took the opportunity to settle themselves 
within our limits." So far, then, from keeping the Frenchmen 
out, the Colony invited them in. In the face of such evidence 
"Sabino" asserts, that the Popham affair " proved title as against 
the former and never-renewed claims of France." Does he 
mean that the French claims were never renewed after 1608? 



33 

Would he wipe out from history the French and Indian wars, 
and the bloody strife for supremacy between the French and 
English, that went on for a century and a half, and culminated 
in the overthrow of French power in 1760 ? 

We have thus with patience, and we trust with candor, exam- 
ined in detail " Sabino's " statement of the Fopham theory ; and, 
if in our former article we slighted its historic claims, they have 
now, we hope, received due attention. 

'' Sabino " omitted from his formal statement — but inserted 
it in another part of his paper — the claim which Fopham 
writers usually bring into the foreground, namely, that the 
Fopham Colony was "the Jirst colonial occupation of the soil 
of New England under English enterprise." What rank will he 
assign to Bartholomew Gosnold's occupation of Cuttyhunk, on 
the south shore of Massachusetts, in 1602 ? Gosnold there and 
then made a settlement, which he intended to be permanent. 
He and his men built a fort and a storehouse, and collected a 
valuable freight to send home to England. The cellar walls of 
the house they occupied can be identified at the present day. 
They planted wheat, barley and oats. " Here," says Bancroft, 
(i. p. 112,) "the foundations of tlie first New England colony 
were to be laid." We do not claim that Gosnold founded a 
colony. He attempted it, and failed ; but he did all that the 
Fopham people did, and even more. He made American colo- 
nization an honorable enterprise, and showed that it could be 
made profitable. Gosnold's men were not convicts. They 
each had a share in the undertaking ; and jealousy as to the 
distribution of their gains led to the return of the whole company 
to England. The sale of their freight made it a profitable 
adventure. They spread the most favorable reports of the 
regions they had visited, and brought the best evidence that it 
was a country worth possessing. The Fopham men, on the 
other hand, returned to England in penury and disgrace, " bur- 
dening the bounds where they had beene with all the aspersions 
5 



34 

that possibly they could deiiise, seeking by that meanes to dis- 
courage all others." The death of Queen Elizabeth prevented 
Gosnold's return to the Elizabeth Islands ; Init his representa- 
tions and cheerful energy awakened an interest in America that 
resulted in the Charter of 1606,, under which the Northern and 
Southern Virginia settlements were projected. When wo com- 
pare what Gosnold and his men did in 1602, with what Popham 
and his felons did in 1607, it requires a degree of audacity 
rising to sublimity to assert, that " the Popham Colony was the 
Jirst colonial occupation of the soil of New England under 
English enterprise." 

Ex-Governor Washburn, of Cambridge, in a speech he made 
at the tirst Popham Celebration in 1862, suggested that if they 
would set up the claim that Noah's Ark landed on one of the 
adjacent hills, and arrange a Celebration in honor of the event, 
he would volunteer to come and take part in it, without doubting 
it was true (Pop. Mem., p. 157). The suggestion is worthy of 
the serious consideration of the Pophamites. The historical diffi- 
culties in the way are but mole-hills compared with the Alpine 
absurdities of their present theory. Noah's Ark was an impoi-tant 
fact in the history of the human race. Noah and his family 
were respectable persons. The only circumstance we know, to 
the discredit of the old patriarch, is excusable on the ground 
that there was then no "Maine Law," or even a "judicious 
license system." The prejudice attached to the descendants of 
one of his sons, has been neutralized by the Emancipation Proc- 
lamation, and the passage of the Civil Rights Bill over the head 
of President Johnson. The coast is now clear for Noah's Ark. 
Let the Celebration come off" by all means. Why is it more un- 
reasonable to suppose that the Eastern Continent was settled 
from the Western, than vice versa ? Much as we hate celebra- 
tions of all kinds, we also volunteer ; and, if we cannot attend, 
we promise to write a letter, developing still further the theory ; 
and " Sabino " shall have full permission to print it as an Appen- 
dix to the public address. 



" Sabino" is evidently in trouble about the " cannon story," and 
well be may be. He says " Williamson is inclined to discredit 
it." Williamson has this inclination, not on the ground of lack 
of evidence that it occurred; but on the ground of its shocking 
inhumanity, and the discredit it throws upon the colonists. We 
are inclined to discredit it, because of the disgrace it casts upon 
the human race. But the ugly fact still remains (to use William- 
son's words) that it was "believed to be true by the ancient and 
well-informed inhabitants on the Sagadahoc." Again " Sabino " 
would have us believe, that, whereas the Indians, several years 
later, told the Jesuit missionaries some of the outrages they had 
sufiered from the Popham colonists, and did not tell them this, 
therefore the story was invented in Massachusetts, seventy years 
after it was alleged to have happened. The Jesuits, in their 
Relations, were describing the friendly feelings of the Indians 
towards themselves. They doubtless heard, with the other cru- 
elties mentioned, the cannon story ; but they rightly judged, that, 
while it would not contribute to the point they were illustrating, 
it would appear to readers so inhuman, and hence so improbable, 
as to weaken the credibility of their other statements. Besides, 
" Sabino's " argument founded on an omission, if it proves any- 
thing, proves too much for him. It proves that not one of the 
many propositions set up by the Pophamites are true, for not one 
of them is mentioned in the Jesuit Relations. The insinuation 
that the cannon story originated in Massachusetts, is a curious 
and comical blunder. The District of Maine, Fort Popham in- 
cluded, was at the date specified a part of Massachusetts. 
''Sabino" sees this foot-note in Williamson: "Supplement to 
King Philip's Wars, A. D., 1675, p. 75," and he supposes that 
1675 was the date the statement was published, whereas it was 
the date when King Philip's War commenced. The book was 
not printed till 1716. He does not inform us how "the ancient 
and well-informed inhabitants on the Sagadahoc " could have 
been misled bv a statement invented in Massachusetts in 1716. 



" Sabino " firmly lioklS; with Mr. Kidder; that the vessel of 
thirty tons, built at Sagadahoc, made a voyage across the ocean. 
" Brief Relation, 1G22," he says, "gives ns much information 
about its arrival in England as about the arrival of the ship." 
But " Brief Relation " says nothing about the arrival of either ves- 
sel. It records simply, "the arrival of these people\\&vQ in England 
was a wonderful discouragement," etc. The leaders, and the 
main body of these people, we believe, i-eturned safely to England 
in the " Mary and John ;" and this is sufficient to fulfil all the con- 
ditions of the narrative in " Briefe Narration," Strachey and the 
other old chroniclers. " Sabino," however, is ambitious that all 
(including those who left in the "'pretty pynnace ") should arrive 
in England, and show up the new craft. He says, " This 
word all used by Gorges and Ogilby utterly forbids the 
statement of your correspondent." Gorges's all has no reference 
to the arrival in England. His words are, " all resolved to quit 
the place (Sagadahoc) and with one consent to away." That 
<' Sabino " should quote Ogilby as an authority, indicates an un- 
familiarity in the authentic sources of New England history which 
Ave regret to see. Mr. John A. Poor (Popham Memorial, p. 73) 
says : " It is well known that the Popham Colony, or a portion oj 
them, returned to England in 1608." It strengthens Mr. Poor's 
argument on the importance of the Colony in maintaining English 
supremacy, to claim that a portion of the colonists remained in 
the country. We have quoted the opinion of our esteemed Port- 
land friend for "Sabino's" benefit; and not because it carries 
additional conviction to our mind. One who writes after this 
fashion : "They finished their vessel of fifty ( ?) tons in the winter 
and spring, called the Virginia, of Sagadahoc, in which tliey re- 
turned to England," — thus adding twenty tons to the size of the 
vessel, and crowding all into the "pretty pynnace," leaving the 
"Mary and John" to return in ballast, — is not amenable to the 
common code of literarv and historical criticism. 



The Popliam Colony, in fine, was a scandalous and complete 
failure. The thing, as an historical event, was dead and buried. 
The grass, for more than two centuries and a half, had kindly 
grown over it, obliterating even from the memory of man the 
spot where those disgraceful scenes were enacted. In the year 
1849, the Hakluyt Society of London printed Strachey's nar- 
ration, and furnished a clew to the burial place. Nothing would 
satisfy a few excellent people in Maine but to dig up the sicken- 
ing remains, and flaunt them under the nostrils of the community. 
Here was an offense against decency and sanitary regulations, 
indictable at common law. In choh;ra times the proceeding is 
insufferable. 

No one imagines that the Popham investigators commenced 
operations with any other than the amiable motive of contribut- 
ing to the historic glories of their native State. But they knew not 
for what they were digging. Their first mistake was, that, when 
they came to the putrid mass, they did not carefully replace the 
sod, and say nothing about it. Instead of this, every man 
shouted "Eureka!" They arranged a monster gathering, and 
invited all creation to celebrate with them the Two-hundred and 
Fiftieth Popham Anniversary. People came from the ends of the 
earth ; enjoyed a generous Eastern hospitality ; " drank water, if 
not inspiration, out of the existent Popham well'' (Query — Is 
"Sabino" quite sure that the inspiration came from the li-e/Z?), 
believed as much as they could, and had a good time generally. 
Perhaps history manufactured in this way will stand ; but we 
think not. 

Because historical writers have presumed to examine and 
question their theory, they have grown sullen and morose. They 
abuse Massachusetts ; they spit at Plymouth Rock ; they berate 
the Puritans ; they eulogize Sir John Popham ; and they sigh for 
a system of medieval barbarism which Popham and Gorges 
could not plant on New England soil, because God, in his mercy 
to the human race, had decreed otherwise. 



38 

The true historic glor}^ of the noble State of Maine seems to 
have been lost sight of, in the antiquarian researches of her 
zealous sons, — which is, that the State sprang from the loins of 
Massachusetts. To this fact, the State to-day is indebted for 
every one of those distinctive elements of general intelligence, 
enterprise and thrift that make her what she is, — a New Eng- 
land State, instead of a feudal Virginia or a South Carolina. 
The Massachusetts Puritans came in early, and took possession 
of the land, under a technical construction they gave to their 
own charter, organized municipalities, set up their churches and 
schools, and put down with a strong hand all opposition to their 
authority. The historian of New IJampshire has given a faithful 
picture of the social condition of the Gorges plantation on the 
Agamenticus (York) River, when the Puritans commenced their 
missionary operations. 

" The people were without order or morals, and it is said of 
some of them, that they had as many shares in a woman, as they 

had in a fishing-boat No provision was made for public 

institutions, schools were unknown, and the^^ had no ministers, 
till, in pity of their deplora1)le state, two went thither from Boston 
on a voluntary mission." Belknap's American Biography, i. p. 
387-8. See also Hutchinson's Collections, p. 424. 

The appearance of the Puritans among them did not to the 
Gorges men seem joyous, but grievous ; nevertheless afterward 
it yielded the peaceable fruit of civilization and godliness unto 
them who were exercised thereby. The territory was thus saved 
from the ethics of Popham, the prelacy of Laud and the Stuarts, 
and the barbarism of a colony of outlaws. The civilization ot 
the District of Maine, during the colonial period, was as essen- 
tially Puritan, as that of Massachusetts Bay; and the District 
was represented in the General Court at Boston, from the year 
1G53. This close political and social union continued till the 
admission of the State into the Union in 1820. 



39 

It is the privilege, therefoi^c, of the historical writers of Maine, 
to turn from the unpleasant topic that of late has engaged their 
attention, to the more congenial theme we have suggested. Let 
them, with filial aflfection, recount the virtues and deeds of their 
Puritan ancestors ; and, if they must have an event to celebrate, 
let it be the landing on Plymouth Rock in 1620, or the arrival 
of Winthrop and the Charter in 1630, — events which are theirs 
to celebrate, as well as ours. P. 

P.S. — We ought perhaps to acknowledge Mr. Kidder's kind- 
ness in sending to us a corrected cop}^ of his article in the Portland 
Advertiser, in reply to our notice of Prof. Patterson's Address. 
The article still has so many literary and historical errors, that it 
would be unkindness to its author to review it in its present con- 
dition. We can imagine the inconvenience of having one's writings 
printed so far from home. If IMr. Kidder will fiu'uish us with 
another copy, still fnrther revised, we promise to give it all the 
attention it deserves. P. 



[Boston Daihj Advertiser, Juhj 28, 1866. J 

THE POPHAM COLONY, " FINALLY." 

To the Editors of the Boston Daily Advertiser : — 

Absences have prevented my notice of the article of your 
correspondent " P.," as early as I could have wished. I now 
take it up for some remarks on its most prominent positions. 

To his ciiticisms, both merited and unmerited, I desire to 
bow in meek thankfulness. They are merited only as the 
imperfections were the result of haste in writing on the eve of 
a journey. Though they may injure the advocate, the cause 
stands as impregnable as ever. The unmerited are to be at- 
tributed to the indistinctness of my rapid penmanship. If our 
articles shall have the fortune to come to a second edition, he 
will not be sorry to see that his sagacity has been made useful 
in aid of my argument. 



40 

As to the pervading personalities in the communication, I have 
but little to say. Of my position and acts in connection with 
the commemorations of the colony, it asserts matters which 
never existed, and attributes to me motives which I liave never 
entertained. These allegations do not change the facts of 
history. It is because of this iwrsoiud phase of the discussion, 
that I propose to make no farther reply to your correspondent, 
even if he should attempt a sur-rejoinder. I do not know him. 
But he seems to know me, in this connection, more than well, — 
more than I know of myself, or any one knows or can know 
of me. 

In ascribing to me the origination of the celebrations of the 
Popham Colony, the communication ignores the fact, that the 
" founding " thereof (and I use the word in its dictionary sense) 
was commemorated, in " a bi-centenary celebration," by the Rev. 
Dr. Jenks, "with a party of gentlemen, in 1807." So that, if 
there could be claimed any virtue for an Episcopal origination 
of the commemorative visit to Sabino, — which has never been 
claimed by any one acquainted with the facts, — this early act 
by this lover of the olden days would take it all away. Indeed, 
I have had nothing to do with the later celebrations, as their 
" original inventor and patentee," in any sense whatever. Its 
suggestion even was not Episcopal, but simply historical. I 
have been only auxiliary. 

The communication has not a little to say about the bad traits 
of character in Chief Justice Popham, as displayed in a portion 
of his early manhood. But it wholly neglects testimony — 
elsewhere cited — to traits of an opposite kind, appearing in his 
more matured years. This evidence appears in the writings of 
his cotemporaries, who speak of him in terms of high commenda- 
tion. Whatever might have been his earlier life, the path of 
repentance and amendment was open for his entrance. After 
his marriage, he changed his early courses ; and by his diligence 
in his legal studies qualified himself for his later eminent posi- 



41 

tion. When Stracliev, Smith, Croke and ]\Iather, writing after 
his death, and of . course after his character was completed, call 
him " the upright and noble gentleman," " that honorable pattern 
of virtue," " a person of great learning and integrity," " the 
noble lord," with other words of approval, and none of censure, 
a reader of the paper cannot but wonder that the better part 
of his later life was not noticed as well as the worse parts of 
his earlier. Fuller has placed him among the " Worthies," and 
says : " If Qituksiher could really be Jixed, to what a treasure 
would it amount ! Such is icild youth seriously reduced to 
gravity, as by tins young man did appear." 

The opinion of Lord Campbell in his favor should not be 
neglected by an impartial seeker for truth. He is severe on 
most of the Chief Justices, not sparing even the good Sir Matthew 
Hale. His commendations are therefore the more valuable. In 
his '• Life " of this Chief Justice, he describes the particular traits 
to his discredit, when, with other young men, he entered on his 
illegal acts on the highway; and then says, "We must remember 
that this calling was not then so discreditable as it became after- 
wards." He speaks of the change in his purposes ; his diligence 
as a student ; and, after some quotations-, presented in this dis- 
cussion, he says, "He held the office (of Chief Justice) fifteen 
years, and was supposed to conduct himself in it very credit- 
ably." " Many of his judgments in civil cases are preserved, 
showing that he well deserved the reputation which he enjoyed." 
" On the trial of actions between party and party, he is allowed 
to be strictly impartial, and to have expounded the law clearly 
and soundly." " I believe that no charge could justly be made 
against his purity as a judge." 

And then, as to the reasons why censures were brought against 
him, this biographer says, " Yet, from the recollection of his 
early history, some suspicion always hung about him, and 
stories, probably quite groundless, were circulated to his disad- 
vantage." " Of these we have a specimen " about " Littlecote 

6 



42 

Hull." It is " unfair to load the memory of a judge with the 
obloquy of so g'l-eat a crime, upon such unsatisfactory testimony." 
A distinguished ruler — more exalted than Popham, whom Pal- 
frey calls " that eminent person " — once wrote, " Remember not 
the sins of my youth." 

If lie was called "tiie hanging judge," it was because criminals 
were to be punished. Lloyd says, to his credit, that " the de- 
served death of some scores preserved the lives and livelihood 
of some thousands ; travellers owing their safety to this judge's 
severity many years after his death." Aubrey says the same. 

But, if all were true, as alleged to the disparagement of the 
Chief Justice, is there so necessary a connection between him and 
the colonists at Sabino as that they, except the ten men in office, 
must therefore have been ''villains and convicts " ? He certainly 
has on all sides the praise of having been the earliest and the 
most active promoter of colonization on our wild New England 
shores. In this relation he gained the distinct commendation of 
Hubbard, as '• the first that ever procured men or means to 
possess New England," — •'the main pillar" of the enterprise, 
with not the remotest allusion to any such acts in its accomplish- 
ment as are mentioned by your correspondent. His statement 
leads one to think, that he regarded these early movements as 
preparatory to the settlements in Massachusetts. He certainly 
has said nothing that can lead us to suppose he connected 
"convicts" with Popham's efforts. 

There is a statement made, derived from Strachcy's use of the 
word " prepared," in two instances, as though this iircparatian 
consisted chiefly in furnishing convicts for transportation to Saga- 
dahoc. Where is the proof? There is not a word in the con- 
text to warrant any such application, and indeed no where else. 
One of the " prepared " expeditions was captured by a Spanish 
fleet, and the men held in a kind of piratical duress. The com- 
munication proceeds to say, in condemnation of the old historians 
and Popham, that "no word of sympathy was expressed by the 



43 

old wi'iters for the persons enslaved by the Spaniards ; nor did 
Popliam, so far as we know, make any attempts to rescue them 
from their hard fate." Alas ! where is the proof of this sweep- 
ing assertion ? Exactly opposite was the fact. His humane 
regard for the captives was forthwith put into action. It would 
have been well for the furtherance of history, if one well versed 
in "the old writers" against Popham had also seen and produced 
a single testimony in his favor. Take one sentence from Gorges, 
relating to this Spanish capture : " The affliction of the captain 
and his company put the Lord Chief Justice to charge and myself 
to trouble in procuring their liberties, which was not soon ob- 
tained." This citation is enough to show his efforts for their 
release, and proves great humanity on the part of this " noble 
patron of justice and virtue," as he has been well described ; 
and that he was not herein " a heartless wretch," as your corre- 
spondent writes, and furnishes no proof of his allegation. 

The quotations from Lloyd — himself mostly valuable for his 
quotations — are pi'ominently presented, as bearing on the char- 
acter of the colonists, lie says that Popham "' provided for 
malefactors." But that is no certain proof that he sent them 
to Sagadahoc. The plan and its completion are different things, 
and its completion was not necessarily here. " He first set up 
the discovery of New England to maintain and employ those 
that could not honestly live in the Old." But this proposal, 
this " setting up," if made in regard to Sagadahoc, does not 
jyrove that the suggestion was ever carried out. With the singu- 
larly imperfect knowledge of foreign geography, that has always 
characterized English education, all A'irginia seems to have been 
New England, and vice versa. New England was North and 
South Virginia. We admit the plan. We demand the j^roof 
that convicts were banished to this region. Besides, where is 
the inhumanity of the proposal, or its fulfilment ? It was in- 
tended to save the lives of criminals, who otherwise would have 
been hung, according to evidence and the laws of their time ; 



44 

and doubtless the culprits coudemned would have deemed the 
provision n)erciful, that by banishment allowed them to live. 

The quotation from Sir William Alexander has been often 
made ; and it is valuable, as coinciding accurately with the views 
expressed in my communications. His book is rare ; and I take 
his words from your columns : — 

"Thofe that went thither being preffed to that enterprize, as 
endangered by the Law, or their own neceffities, (no enforced thing 
prouing pleafant, difcontented perfons futfering while they act can 
feldom have good fuccefs and neuer fatiffaction) they after a Winter 
ftay dreaming of new hopes at home returned back with the iirft 
occafion." 

Here we arc accurately taught that the people — that is, the 
laborers in the colony — went '• as endangered l)y the law, or 
their own necessities." How were they " endangered " ? By 
what '' law " ? By what " necessity " ? A writer of that time 
furnishes the reply, — in the crowded population, the poverty 
of the working class, and the encroachments of their rich neigh- 
bors ; and urges emigration as the relief. He writes the follow- 
ing : — 

" Look seriously into the land, and see whether there bee not just 
cause, if not a necessity to seek abroad. The people do swarme 
in the land as }■ oung bees in a hive in June : insomuch that there 
is hardly room for one man to live by another. The mightier, like 
old strong bees, thrust the weaker, as 3'ounger out of their hives. 
Lords of manors convert townships, in which were a hundredth or 
two hundredth communicants, to a shepheard and his dog. The 
true laboring husbandman, that sustaineth the prince by the plow, 
Avho was wont to feed many poore, to set man}- people on work, and 
pay tAvice as much subsidie and fifteenes to the king for his j^ropor- 
tion of earth, as his landlord did for ten times as much ; that was 
wont to furnish the church with saints, the musters with able per- 
sons to fight for their soveraigne, is now turned laborer, and can 
hardly scape the statutes of rogues and vagrants. . . . The poore 



45 

metall man worketli his bones ont and sweltetli himself in the fire ; 
3'et for all his labor, having charge of wife and children, he can 
hardly keep himselfe from the almes box. . . . The poor man 
receiveth very neere four pence for every sixepeny worth of work. 
The thonghtfull poore woman that hath her small children standing 
at her side and hanging on her breast, she worketh with her needle 
and laboureth with her fingers, her candle goeth not out by night, 
she is often deluding the bitterness of her life with sweete songs, that 
she singeth to a heavy heart. ... I warrant you her songs want 
no passion ; she never saith, O Lord, but a salt teare droppeth 
from her sorrowfull heart, that weepeth with the head for company 
with teares of sweetest bloud. And Avhen all the week is ended, 
she can hardly earn salt enough for her water gruel to feede on 
upon the Sunday." 

Surely here is a picture of extreme poverty, — fully corrobo- 
rated by a document in Mather, — showing how " the land grew 
weary of her inhabitants ; " and how " children, neighbors and 
fi'iends, especially tlie poor, were counted the greatest bur- 
dens." It tells us how the honest yeomanry and worthy labor- 
ers of that day were harassed by the encroachments of their 
" mightier " neighbors, and the rigid oppression of the civil law. 
They were " endangered " through no fault of their own. One 
cannot but recall a part of the petition of Agur, — " lest I be 
poor, and steal " to support life. But are we to consider such 
men as "rascals and villains"? And were any such men, sen- 
tenced, as men of guilt, to go forth as a part of the colony ? 
Symonds here gives a full and sufficient interpretation to the 
meaning of Lloyd and Alexander. 

Let us now see who had the power to sentence and tix the 
place of exile. The Statute of 39 Elizabeth c. iv, 1597-8, 
to which your correspondent refers as being ample enough to 
cover " the plan of colonizing by banishment of convicts," au- 
thorizes this penalty for " dangerous rogues," wlio " shall and 
may lawfully be banished out of this Realme and all other the 
Domynions thereof." This was to be done " by the Justices of 



46 

the Peace " at the " Quarter Sessions." Not a word is said 
about the Chief Justice. The place to which they were to be 
sent was to be decided " by the Privie Council ; " and thus, cer- 
tainly, not by Popham alone. So that, if there were shame in the 
transaction, the most honored men of the nation were equally 
involved in the disgrace. It is unfair and ungenerous to single 
him out to meet a purpose, as the sole object of obloquy and 
rebuke. 

And now, as to the return of these persons to England. Your 
correspondent, assuming that a part of them were convicts, truly 
says, in agreement with his assumption, that they would not be 
" over-anxious to revisit their native land. They had saved 
their necks once l)y emigrating, and were not in haste to put 
them again into the halter." And so he invents the story about 
a second pinnace, with which they could " lead generally a wild 
and free life, such as was congenial to their character and dis- 
positions." This is a precious statement ; but it happens to be 
directly opposite to the citation fearlessly made from Sir William 
Alexander, which declares that " Those that went thither, — as 
endangered by the laws, — dreaming of new hopes of home, re- 
turned thither with the first occasion." None were left behind. 
If they had been convicts, they would have pursued some such 
plan as is intimated by your coi'respondent, and not have gone 
back to the hazard of certain death. For the statute last quoted 
enacts, " if any such Rogues, so banished as aforesaid, shall 
i-eturne againe into any part of this Rcalme or Dominion of 
Wales without lawiul Lycence or Warrant so to do, that in 
every such case such ofience shall be Fellony, and the Party 
offending therein shall suffer Death as in case of Fellony." This 
was but poor encouragement for convicts to seek their native 
shores. The winter had been hard. But Captain Davies, who 
had borne news of the " success " of the enterprise to England, 
had come back to Sagadahoc in the spring, " with a shipp laden 
full of vitualls " and other useful things, so that starvation had 



47 

no horrors ; and the summer was at hand. Sir William testifies 
that they had " new hopes " inviting them to go home. But, if 
they were conderfined criminals, what " new hopes " could have 
been cherished by men who had nothing to expect but certain 
detection, l)y the letter R '' branded in the left shoulder," for 
identification, as soon as they stepped on their native shores; and 
penal death as its sequel ? These " hopes " must have been 
" new " indeed, if they rested only on a halter, a hangman, and a 
gallows 1 Here your correspondent and one of his chief wit- 
nesses entirely disagree. The former says, they " were not over- 
anxious to revisit their native land," fearing the halter. The 
witness says, that "they returned back with the first occasion" — 
hasting, and hopeful of a better condition than the one they had 
left. The one says, that, as liberated jail-birds, they led a roving 
life here, fearing death at home. The other, in effect, says they 
had a happy voyage to England, with bright anticipations of a 
more prosperous life ! 

We may now look at the kind of men who were to go as set- 
tlers to the early colonies on our coast. The Charter of James, 
April 10, 1606, under which this colony was formed, gives the 
information. It proves that the specially enumerated patentees, 
" they and every one of them, shall and may, at all and every 
time and times hereafter, have, take, and lead in the said voyage, 
and for and towards the said Plantations, and Colonies, and to 
travel thitherward, and to abide and inhabit there, in every the 
said Colonies and plantations, such and so many of our subjects 
as shall willingly accompany them or any of them, in the said 
voyages and Plantations." 

The reader will note the sole condition annexed, as to the 
persons selected to go : " such and so many of our subjects, as 
shall WILLINGLY accompany " any or all of the patentees. Can 
any language be plainer ? Force by the sentence of the civil law 
is not here thought of. The " willingness " of the " honest," liard 
pressed yeomanry, seeking to better their livelihood, is here pro- 



48 

vidcd for. The " willinj:; " ones are allowed to go, except such 
as, by the royal power might " be specially restrained." So that 
tlie real rogues, however " willing " to go, might thus be forbid- 
den, lest they should contaminate the honest men, described by 
Gorges, who, " not liking to be hired out as servants to foreign 
states, tiiouglit it better became them to put in practice the re- 
viving resolution of those free spirits, that rather chose to spend 
themselves in seeking a new world, than servilely to be hired out 
but as slaughterers in the quarrels of strangers." The same 
provision existed in the patents to Gilbert and Raleigh. Yet no 
one has supposed that these leaders took convicts. 

Yet this is not all. The same Charter of 1G06 expressly 
provides : " that all and every the Persons being our subjects, 
which shall dwell and inliabit within every or any of the said 
several Colonies or Plantations, and every of their Children, 
which shall happen to be born within any of the Limils and Pre- 
cincts of the said several Colonies and Plantations, shall have 
and enjoy all Libei'ties, Franchises and Immunities, within any 
of our other Dominions, to all Intents and Purposes, as if they 
had been abiding and born, within this our Realm of England, 
or any other of our said Dominions." Xow, if the Popham 
Colony Avas composed of convicts, how enviable their condition! 
The sentence of the law did not touch them, except in words ! 
They still had all the " Liberties " of the most innocent English- 
man on his native soil ! They were " subjects," — " loving sub- 
jects," as the same class of " willing " emigrants were called in 
the Charter of 1609. What "convicts " ever had such "Fran- 
chises and Immunities " since the world began ? Their state 
was nothing less than perfect freedom ! They were, therefore, 
no convkts at all ; and so could return home safely, and with 
" new hopes," just as soon as they deemed the change desirable. 

In double confirmation of this fact, we may go to the Charter 
of 18 James, Nov. 3, 1620, which speaks of the efforts made in 
divers years past, in the Northern Colony, by former grantees, 



49 

who had " taken actual possession of the Continent," and had 
" settled already some of our People in Places agreeable to their 
Desires in those parts." This, certainly, is very far from sus- 
taining the opinion, that the occupants of Sagadahoc were con- 
victs. For they were settled in a place " agreeable to their 
Desires," until calamities darkened all their prospects. It is 
worth noting here, that Lord Campbell says nothing about Pop- 
ham in connection with convicts and the colony. This omission 
is significant. 

A question is proposed, with an air of confidence, as if its 
answer must demolish the positions of mj' former article. It is 
this : " Will ' Sabino ' please point out the ' law ' under which 
James sent off a hundred convicts in 1619, that did not exist in 
1606?" The demand is adroitly made, but not pertinentl3\ 
To make it touch the point, it should have been 16U7. My reply 
is readily given. 

The statute for the punishment of rogues by banishment, al- 
ready noted, (39 Eliz. ch. iv.,) expired by its own limitation, in 
1601 ; when it was renewed, to continue till the end of the first ses- 
sion of the next Parliament, which was held in 1603-4. It was 
then re-enacted, (1 James, ch. iv. and xxv.,) when the additional 
provision was made, that persons condemned under its sanctions 
should be branded on the left shoulder with "' a greate Romane 
R," for their detection in case of their unlicensed return, so as to 
secure the death of the offeuder, "as in case of Felonie." This 
statute was to continue *•' until the end of the first session of the 
next Parliament" (ch. xxv.). I have no means at hand of know- 
ing the precise date when this session closed; but the Parlia- 
ment itself ended on May 27, 1606, and the statute was not 
revived. The temper of the king and that body was sho^vn in 
the statute (3 James ch. xxvii.) entitled, "An acte for the King's 
most gracious generall and free Pardon." The next Parliament 
began Nov. 18, 1606, and ended July 4, 1607. Such was 
the forbearance of the supreme legislature in relation to the 
7 



50 

transportation of condemned criminals, that the session passed 
away, and the law, that had expired by its own limitation, was 
allowed to remain in this state of its natural death. Transpor- 
tation seems not to have been in favor. 

Therefore, from " the end of the firste session " of the Parlia- 
ment whose final session was terminated May 27, 1606, till 
after the Popham Colony sailed, May 31, 1607, there was no 
statute of transportation in existence. 

A re-enactment of the law, or rather a law for punishing 
rogues by the workhouse, and not by transportation, was not 
made until the Parliament beginning Feb. 9, 1609. This was 
four days more than a year after George Popham's death, 
and a year and a half after the death of the Chief Justice. So 
that here was at least an interval of more than two years and 
three-fourths, when there was no law for the exile of convicts 
from the royal dominions. In this space of time, the Popham 
Colony had its beginning, its continuance and its end, — beginning 
more than a year after the law had died ; continuing through the 
larger part of the year ; and ending nearly another year before it 
was revived, in a very difierent form, and with a milder penalty. 
During this period, no law appears in the " Statutes of the 
Realm " for the transportation of convicts ; and it is perfectly 
incredible that any persons were so sentenced by the justices of 
the peace, and sent to Sagadahoc under any sanction of the 
highest judicial authority in the realm, with the specific designa- 
tion of the place by the Privy Council. 

The preamble of the statute of 1609 for "punishing rogues" 
makes known the inactivity of the magistrates in the enforcement 
of former provisions, and the desuetude into which this law had 
fallen. It declares that the earlier " Statutes had not been duly 
and severely putt in execution." Therefore the requisitions are 
made stronger, to bind the proper officers to their more stringent 
execution, in regard to "Houses of Correction." Transporta- 
tion is not even hinted at. This previous easy state of affairs 



51 

on this topic shows that the rigor of expulsion, ascribed to Pop- 
ham, is a thought of kter times. 

It is also to be noted, that the Cliartcr of 1608 is in strict har- 
mony with the fact that the expired law had not been revived. 
Among the twenty-seven Acts of 3, 4 James, 1G05-6, and the 
thirteen of 4, 5 James, 1606-7, no one appears on the pages to 
authorize tlie exportation of criminals. Those who went to either 
of the Virginias were to go " willingly," and enjoy their " liber- 
ties." If, in any other book of laws besides the " Statutes of the 
Realm," if there be such, or by any new and singular interpreta- 
tion of any provision there can be found a rule requiring the 
transportation of convicts, it will not thence follow that any 
were sent to Sagadahoc. For the Charter will still say that only 
volunteers were to go, who should be free men as long as they 
remained in connection with the company. 

I did not refer to Ogilby and Chalmers as original authorities, 
but as good investigators. The former has been long known. 
My favorable opinion of the latter is drawn from the Preface 
to his " Introduction to the History' of the Revolt in the Ameri- 
can Colonies." Your correspondent seems to undervalue him. 
But to sustain my estimate, I may quote the expressions of the 
American editor of the above-named volumes. " His works are 
deemed to possess much merit as the result of profound research 
and a discriminating judgment." — " His official station gave him 
access to all state papers." — "He took advantage of this oppor- 
tunity, to investigate in its original sources the history of the 
colonies." — " His work ( Political Annals ) has ever been 
quoted with entire confidence and respect; and this circumstance 
speaks clearly in favor of the author's candor and honesty." 
When he speaks of no earlier transportation than 1619, I have 
been ready to give him credit. Your correspondent refers to 
him as Avriting, " that the policy of sending convicts to the planta- 
tions originated with King James, and that in the year 1619 
he issued an order to send a hundred dissolute persons to 



Virginia." I am content with this statement. Bancroft tliinks 
" some of them were convicts : but it must be remembered that 
the crimes of which they were convicted were chiefly political ; " 
and political felons, as well as those whom in the same volume 
he calls " the Puritan felons that freighted the fleet of Winthrop," 
were " endangered by the law ; " and yet not for this reason to 
be regarded as tainted in the least with moral guilt. His opin- 
ion, too, is that there was never sent to South Virginia — for 
he seems not to have heard of the accusations brought against 
the northern colony — any '• considerable number '" of persons 
convicted of " social crimes ; " " certainly not enough to aflect 
its character." This statement may be taken as a sufficient 
reply to the charge that Popham " stockt " the plantations out 
of ''all the gaoles of England." Indeed, all that Bacon, nearly 
twenty years after his colony had ceased, and other far later 
writers have said, on the topic contained in the quotation from 
him, relates to the later affairs in the southern colony : and can 
be connected with Popham only as he was a prime mover in the 
enterprise of colonization, carried on after his death. It cannot 
be shown that they had Sagadahoc in mind. Weber, as •• re- 
vised and cori-ected " by Professor Bowen, adheres to 1619. 

Against a remark of mine, the communication states, th?it there 
was " no later occupancy of Xew England till the Pilgrims ar- 
rived in 1620." I said '^ the Popham Colony was followed by a 
succession of occupancies, that proved title." I say so still. I 
did not mean that all these occupancies were colonies. They 
were at ^klonhegan. by Sir Francis Popham and Captain John 
Smith : at Pemaquid, by the annual visits of the English from 
Virginia ; at Mount Desert, by Argall ; at Saco, by Vines ; at 
Plymouth, by the Pilgrims and by numerous others, after that 
great and memorable event in our national history. They were 
made under the protection of the Charter of James in 1606; 
energetically promoted in the outset by Popham, " the first to 
procure men and means to possess Xew England ; " and sustained 



53 

for years at great expense by Sir Ferdinando Gorges. In tliis 
connection I wish to supply an omission noticed by your corre- 
spondent, where I said, that the colony " proved title as against 
the former and never-revived claims of France." " West of the 
Kennebec " was in my mind, but not written. I thank him for 
the correction, as it strengthens my position. It would have 
been better to have said, " the French never had any possession 
on the coast, west of the Kennebec." 

As to the settlement of Gosnold, I have before shown that it 
was not a " chartered colony." It was deserted on the day when 
its small house was scarcely fitted for a permanent dwelling. It 
was " undertaken on private account ; " asserted no general 
claim ; proved no title ; and was not renewed. 

The powder and cannon stories appear to be singularly con- 
fused by Williamson. His misplaced footnote referring to the 
History of King Philip's War has misled us both. It is made 
as authority for the latter, when it should be for the former, and 
the tradition (I quote from memory) is from " an ancient mar- 
iner." As it is unsupported, it can hardly be claimed as history. 
As to the cannon story, one of our best antiquarians thinks that 
it has had no earlier mention than is found in Morse and Parish, 
about two centuries after its alleged occurrence, as derived from 
the Norridgewock Indians. Such a tradition is of very little 
account. If these stories had been true, it is marvellous that 
the " speechifying " Indians round about Arrowsic should not 
have told their prowess and their sufferings to the listening- 
Jesuits in 1611. It may be well to know that a valued New 
Hampshire historian locates the narrative about the cannon at 
Dover, N. H., in the time of Waldron, when a large number of 
Indians were captured by stratagem. If the servants of the 
colony set dogs on the meddlesome Indians, the wise men in 
council in a later colony in New England, as Hazard gives it, de- 
cided to employ " mastiffe-dogs " to hunt down Indians in 1656. 
Whv not blame both ? 



54 

That portions of the population in Maine ^vere corrupt, after 
settlements were dotted along the coast, is true. Deterioration 
often follows colonization. For all the influence for good that 
Massachusetts has spread, here and elsewhere, all ought to be 
glad, though here it was somewhat irregularly introduced. The 
celebrations at Sabino Head are not intended to detract from 
the merits of Plymouth Rock. Tliey were many. It is no harm 
to wish that they had been more. 

The letter of Mr. Kidder relative to the *• pretty pynnace of 
about thirty tonne," is again referred to by your correspondent. 
What are we to understand by the few notices of her history ? 
Simply this, that on " August 28," " the carpenters labored about 
the building of a small pinnace." Their first act was to pre- 
pare the timber from the surrounding forest, — not necessarily of 
" green pine," where the ridge bears oak, maple and spruce now, 
and perhaps did then, — and put it into shape for future use. It 
was left to season during the autumnal months. Then, after 
Captain Davies returned to England, with an account of the "for- 
wardness of their plantation," on the 15th of December, the 
seasoned timber was " framed," and the craft completed, as the 
" Brief Relation " says, " notwitlistanding the coldness of the 
season and the small help they had." For reasons satisfactory 
to the leaders of the colony, after Captain Davies returned to 
them, Strachey says "they all ymbarqued in the new arrived 
shipp and in the new pynnace, the Virginia, and sett saile for 
England." Gorges says they " all resolved to quit the place, 
and with one consent to [go] away." Sir William Alexander 
says, " Those that went thither . . . returned back with new 
hopes." The " Briefe Relation " says the news from home " made 
the whole company to resolve upon notliing but their return with 
their ships ; • . . having built a pretty bark of their own, which 
served them to good purpose, as easing them in their returning;" 
and asserts "the arrival of these people here in England," — of 
course, the same "people" who enibarked, and in the same "ships" 



in wliicli they commenced the voyage. Any other interpretation 
will be a violent perversion of language. As to any persons of 
the colony remaining to be rovers on the coast in another sup- 
posed pinnace, it will be time enough to consider that conjecture, 
when proof shall be brought to change it into history. It will be 
" credulity " to answer such a '' demand " on our faith, as long as 
it is unsupported by evidence ; and we shall still believe that " The 
Virginia " was not, perhaps the first craft of the Northmen, 
French, Basques, Dutch, or Indians, of Avhom we were not think- 
ing — but was the pioneer ship of the English jfcojylc in the new 
world, and was a striking proof of the skill and enterprise of 
the laboring colonists, with Digby, the London shipwright, as 
their head in her construction. 

But, whatever may be said of the enterprise or its details, 
whether favorable or unfavorable, the true and single point for 
grave consideration is the prominent fact, that a colony was 
founded at the mouth of the Kennebec under the charter of James, 
1606, which Popham "certainly was a chief instrument in pro- 
curing," and that this was the Jirst thus laid in New England 
under English sway. 

No personalities, no imputation of sinister and never existing 
motives, no disparagement of the character of the prime movers 
and later advocates, — for Gorges has been blamed as well as 
Popham, — no reproaches thrown upon the laboring colonists, 
and no finger of derision pointed at the failure of their purpose, 
should turn the reader of history away from this path. The 
leading minds in England, with the King as tiieir friend, were 
actuated by the desire to turn to good account the discoveries of 
the early navigators ; the reports of fishermen returning from our 
coast, and the more systematic researches of Gosnold, who, 
Strachey says, came " for discovery ; " and Weymouth, whose 
narrative, and Pring, whose exact description pointed out the 
Kennebec as the place for speedy occupation. Emphasis was 
given to the determination of the associates, by their bearing with 



56 

them a charter and a constituent code of laws, carrying out the 
principles of the English Constitution. An expedition of that 
nature, and at that time, required relatively much more of thought, 
energy and means than one of ten times its numlaers and power 
would do at the present day. The fact, that it came directly to 
tlie Kennebec, shows that its course and destination did not de- 
pend on any capricious views of its commander ; but were in 
accordance with a previously matured plan " for the seizing such 
a place as they were directed unto by the council of the colony." 
Its approach near to the claimed territory of France implies a 
previous knowdedge of the coast, and a purpose to take pos- 
session within the chartered limits, fully up the undisputed 
boundary line. This occupation, and those made in the few fol- 
lowing years, were called in the patent of 18 James, Nov. 3, 
1620, the "actual possession of the continent;" thus showing 
how exalted a value was placed on these incipient, though feeble 
measures, by the highest authority in the mother land. The 
commercial purposes of the undertaking at Sagadahoc were not 
all. A religious purpose was connected therewith, and carried 
on during its continuance. Its great purpose was to secure title 
within the tei'ritory granted to the company. Signal disasters 
attended the later part of its life ; and, though it failed commer- 
cially, Gorges " had no reason greatly to despair of means." 
In its historic influence, and in its opening the way for immediate 
and successive efforts, it was, in the words of Maine's most 
worthy and distinguisluid living historian, '*' one of the steps in 
the grand march of civilization." 

As such, and as the first chartered " step " on our rock-bound 
coast by •' English hearts and hands," we have thought it proper 
to do it honor ; and this too as persons united in no one single 
denomination of Christians. Wc have taken pleasure in aiding 
to bring before the appreciative mind of the community " this 
initial 1)01111 in the history of the settlement of New England," 
and its bearing on subsequent settlements along our shores. We 



57 

have thought that the Charter of 1G06 gave life to this and other 
enterprises. It was in liarmony with its design and privileges, 
that " the King's Majesty and the bishops consented '' to the 
wishes of the people at Leyden to remove to this land ; and so 
far gave them the aid of the Church, which Mather sa}s was not 
possessed with the spirit of persecution against them, though 
some of its members indulged that folly. The several documents 
following this leading instrument of title and occupation, such as 
the enlarged charters, " The First Plymouth Patent," and the 
patents issued for the benefit of Maine and Massachusetts, are 
traceable to this source, and to the able men concerned in its 
origination and provisions. So that, in a pure and great histori- 
cal fact and its sequences, we have had enough to warrant our 
past commemorations. It is no fault of ours, that other colonies 
came earlier and later, and did not build a sea-going vessel in 
this northern latitude in the first year of their stay. We rejoice 
where they were successful, permanent, and a blessing to the 
world. But why cannot we be allowed to celebrate an event, 
one of the greatest of its times, without being taunted with say- 
ings, which, while bearing bitterness, need the support of evi- 
dence ; and with words which, however amiably they may have 
been intended, boldly represent us as culprits, " indictable at 
common law " ? 

In taking my leave of your columns, courteously allowed for 
this discussion, I regret that I have been compelled to occupy so 
much space. But much more would have been needed to rectify- 
all the applications of the quotations from the old writers, who, 
so far as the colony of Sagadahoc is concerned, must be explained 
in harmony with the Charter of 1606, which provided only for 
" willing " men to join in the enterprise, and continued to them 
all the franchises of Englishmen at home. I wish now only to 
add, that I stand not alone in my opinions about the Popham 
Colony. Persons of the highest historical authority in the State 
and elsewhere support the same view. One of these, the late 
8 



58 

Bishop Burgess, had designed to write at length on this debated 
subject. He had been in correspondence with the present Duke 
of Somerset for information on one part of its history. He had 
already said, and patriotically too, of the chaplain of the colony, 
" Seymour was the first preacher of the Gospel in the English 
tongue, within the borders of New England, and of the free, loyal 
and unrcvolted portion of these United States. Had he inherited 
all the honors of his almost royal grandsire, they would have 
given him a far less noble place than this, in the history of man- 
kind." But the fatal illness of this eminent historical scholar 
has prevented the intended gift of his deliberate and final testi- 
mony in defence of the claims here set forth in behalf of '' that 
northerue colony uppon the Sagadahoc." Sabino. 



[Boston Daily Advertiser, July 28, 1866.] 

A RUNNING REVIEW OF THE " POPHAM AGAIN 
AND FINALLY." 

To the Editors of the Boston Daily Advertiser : — 

By referring to the Supplement of the Daily Advertiser of the 
31st of May, I see that "pool" has again overflowed, and the 
result is a wishy-washy everlasting flood of nearly four columns 
in small type, some of which seem to be a reply to the fairly- 
written statements and comments of " Sabino ; " but the most of 
it reads very much like one of Van Bureu's old messages with 
which we were served annually, some twenty-five years ago, 
while in barefaced effrontery it much resembles the speeches of 
Jeff. Davis and Wigfall, at the commencement of the late re- 
bellion. Let us wade through this mass of matter which reaches 
from the voyage of Noah to the latest raid on the Pophamites ; 
and here let me remark, that the writer handles that ancient 



59 

navigator's character very much as he does Chief Justice Pop- 
ham's, looking only at its worst side. Why does he not 
assert tliat his ark was built of " green pine," and no one would 
embark in it, or, if they did, they went a fishing, and never 
arrived at Mount Ararat; for there is just as much evidence of 
this as there is in his assertions relative to the vessel built at 
Sabino. But let us follow the writer, and see how he replies 
to " Sabino." First, he finds great difficulty in understanding 
what all others clearly appreciate, and this accounts for many 
of his misstatements, for if a man cannot understand the trutli, 
how can he communicate it? Secondly, he gives us a short 
lesson on style ; but finally concludes " that, after all, it is greatly 
a matter of taste for which there is no accounting." I agree 
with him on this point ; and, as evidence of what his taste is, let 
me make an extract from his description of the discovery of the 
locality of the Popham Colony. " Nothing would satisfy a few 
excellent people of Maine, but to dig up the sickening remains, 
and flaunt them under the nostrils of the community. Here was 
an offense against decency and sanitary regulations, indictable 
at common law. In cholera times the proceeding is insuflera- 
ble. Their first mistake was, that when they came to the putrid 
mass they did not carefully replace the sod." Does this read 
like a review from a student of history? Does it not more 
likely resemble the report of a city scavenger, when the cholera 
is expected ? Then, next, comes a quotation from Lord Bacon's 
essays on plantations in general, published about twenty years 
after the Popham expedition ; and it is difficult to see what it has 
to do with the Popham Colony. If it could be referred to any 
one in particular, it must have been the then transporting of 
such people as he talks of to Virginia. Next, lie asserts that the 
Colony only occupied " a few acres of ground on the promontory 
of Sabino." Will he tell how many more acres were really 
occupied at Jamestown or Plymouth the first six months of their 
existence ? 



60 

Then comes a lepetition of the old traditionary story published 
doiibting-ly by Williamson. A venerable New England writer 
says, " tradition is the biggest liar in the world," and, in this case, 
I certainly acquiesce in his assertion, and I doubt if any respecta- 
ble historian would think of repeating so questionable a tale. 
In speaking of the end of the colony, by reason of the death of 
the two Pophams, he says, '^ did it ever occur to ' Sabino ' that 
his colony must liave had a slender foundation to have fallen into 
ruins at the death of two out of a hundred and twenty per- 
sons ? " Will he tell us how many more than the death of the 
two most prominent persons at Plymouth would have . caused 
its abandonment during their extremity in the spring of 1621 ? 
Certainly, not many. Then comes near a column of abuse on the 
Chief Justice, with abundant extracts from his biographers which 
may all be true ; but, if so, his appointment and continuance on 
the bench was a disgrace and shame to Queen Elizabeth and 
the leading men of her reign. And then he comes to that cannon 
story again. Did it ever occur to him, that, if the statement were 
true, the returning colonists would have related it at home ? For 
such things always come out; and the Pophamites had as bitter 
enemies there as P. is, and so it would have been a part of the 
authentic history of that expedition. Have there not been much 
worse outrages on the poor Indian all over our country since ? 
And then he repeats his doubts about the arrival of that pretty 
pinnace in England, of which there can be no more question 
than of the return of many of the early emigrant ships which 
carried back passengers who were known to have reached there, 
while there is no mention of the ships. 

But he states " Brief Relation says nothing about the arrival of 
either vessel : it records simply the arrival of these people here in 
England." Well that out-Herods Herod : how does he expect 
they got there ? He certainly knows they embarked in both ves- 
sels, for Strachey says, " Wherefore they all ymbarqued in this 
new arrived ship and in the new pynnace, the Virginia, and set 



61 

saile for England." Now, I advise this learned pundit to look 
among his mass of newspapers ; and, if he finds the London Ship- 
ping List of that time, he may be enlightened. And if he still 
doubts let him ask the opinion of any of our best writers on New 
England history, and my word for it he will not find one to in- 
dorse his views. One, certainly, whose opinion is of the greatest 
weight, and as anti-Popham as himself, has given a decided nega- 
tive to his assertions. 

And now comes a long dissertation on the blessings that have 
been experienced in Maine, by Massachusetts extending its gov- 
ernment over it. Some of these moral reflections may be true, 
but many of the inhabitants of that territory did not then see it, 
I certainly agree with him in his appreciation of the energy and 
intelligence of the settlers of Maine and their descendants. They 
are equal to, and very much resemble, those of the other New 
England States ; but what this has to do with Popham, he don't 
tell us. And, finally, he undertakes in a note to give the writer 
of that famous letter about the ship a kick, by stating that a 
writer in a Portland paper has had his article badly printed by 
having it done so far from home ; and, when revised, he will give 
it the attention it deserves. Very kind. 

Having made a somewhat rapid survey of his three or four 
heavy columns, " a mighty maze, and yet without a plan," 
I will look at his famous first attack, or, as the writer in the 
Portland Advertiser calls it, " the fire of his skirmish line;" and 
will now give his assertions there a passing notice, glancing 
over his attack on the Memorial Volume, the defence of Gorges, 
and his abuse of their authors, who are perfectly able to defend 
themselves, and may do so hereafter. He talks strongly about 
" historical verities : " let us see how fairly he treats authentic 
history. And first, will he tell us where he finds the colonists 
called " convicted felons," " cowards. Old Bailey convicts and 
knaves ? " and that " they had saved their necks by emigrating," 
etc., etc. ? Can he point to the book and the page for these " his- 



62 

toiical verities " ? He ma}- it is true quote a writer who says 
" many of them were endangered of the law." So were many 
of the Plymouth colonists, — to their honor, when we consider 
what law was, and what protection human rights had under 
James I. 

Again, let us look at his assertions relative to that " pretty 
pinnace." In his " first consideration," he argues that a sea-worthy 
vessel was never built by the colonists ; and, by inference, would 
make us believe that it was not built at all, saying " there was 
not time between the 15th of December and spring to build a 
sea-worthy vessel," — when not a person but himself who ever pe- 
rused " Brief Relation " or " Strachey " doubted the building and 
sailing for England of such a ship. Next, '^ that they had no 
need of a vessel." As if they did not know their own wants 
better than we do. Can there be much doubt it was the inten- 
tion of the projectors to have a vessel built, and that for this pur- 
pose they sent over " Master Digby and the carpenters " ? And 
then he coolly states she was built of " green pine," and repeat- 
edly calls her a " fishing boat," and implies that she went a fish- 
ing. Will he also give his authority for these statements ? 
Every reader of history knows these assertions are untrue ; and 
till he can clear himself of this charge, let him not undertake to 
lecture others on " historical verities." 

It will be seen that I have not noticed his argument relative 
to the craft built by the French at Port Royal, and which by 
almost a miracle carried the survivors to their homes ; for the 
reason that we were considering English occupation of New 
England, and that alone. French enterprise and colonization 
was an entirely different affair, and had nothing to do with the 
subject under consideration ; and the writer of '^ the letter" could 
not fairly have anticipated that it could be made to refer to any 
but Englishmen. It will also be noticed that I have not under- 
taken to advocate or indorse the Popham enterprise and its 
effects in general, but only to show up some of the errors of its 



63 

opponents. There is and will be a wide difference of opinion 
on that point ; but all will agree that it has been of great benefit 
to printers, and that they have shed a larger quantity of ink in 
elucidating these controversies than was lost in blood in " P.'s " 
imaginary fights with the Indians at Sabino. 

Having made a running review of "P.'s" long columns, I 
would in conclusion offer him some advice, which, I trust, he 
will receive in the same kind way in which it is given. First, 
do not fear that Popham history will ever in the slightest way 
overshadow the lustre of Old Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay. 
They stand too firm to be shaken : their true glories will con- 
tinue to brighten and expand through ages yet to come, till they 
are appreciated and acknowledged throughout the world. Don't 
look on the very worst side of history : much of it is bad enough 
at best ; and we can hardly read some of the annals of our own 
ancestors, written by themselves, without a blush. Do not write 
so ferociously : people are not frightened by ink, particularly 
Pophamites. " A kind word turneth away wrath." Don't ruin 
that preface to the reprint which you have had some two years 
in process of incubation, by bringing Popham and Gorges into 
it, Avhen there is no occasion for it. And, as a general amnesty, 
even for the deepest crimes, is the order of the day, you had 
better accept it on the following cheap terms, viz., as hot 
weather is approaching, and, if you have not killed out the 
Pophamites entirely, — and I don't really think you have even 
rufiied a feather, — they will in August have their picnic cele- 
bration at Sabino as usual, now let us both attend. Then, after 
partaking of their chowder, we will smoke the calumet of peace ; 
drink inspiration — if we can — from that ancient well, but 
certainly good cool water, and something in it, if you say so ; 
and finally bury the hatchet in the remains of that old ditch; 
and pledge ourselves to everlasting peace. 

June, 1866. Sagadahoc. 



// 



BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE POPHAM COLONY. 



DOCUMENTS CIRCULATED BEFORE AND AT THE FIRST CELEBRATION, 

AUGUST 29, 18G2. 

" English Colonization in America. | Public Celebration." A 
brief sketch of the Colony, and of the proposed Celebration, by 
Mr. John A. Poor; which was sent to invited guests. July, 
1862. 

"Historical Celebration at Fort Popham, August 29, 1862." 
Programme of the Celebration. 

''An Order for Morning Prayer" [read by Bishop Burgess]. 
8vo, 8 pp. 

[Thirty-Four] " Toasts | for the | Historical Celebration. | 
To be arranged hereafter in appropriate order." 8vo. 4 pp. 

Cards (4^ by 7^ inches) : — 

1. Latin Inscription for the Memorial Stone. On the re- 
verse, an English Translation. 

2. Latin Inscription as before. On the reverse, " The First 
Colony I on the Shores of New England | was Founded here, | 
August 19th, 0. S., 1607 | under | George Popham. | 

A printed circular headed " Public Historical Celebration," 
dated August 12, 1862 ; which was sent to invited guests, with a 
"Private Explanatory Note," stating that the Celebration "is held 
under the auspices of the Maine Historical Society, which pro- 
poses to, print a full report in the form of a Memorial 
Volume." 



m 



NEWSPAPER ARTICLES WITH REFERENCE TO THE FIRST CELE- 
BRATION. 

Bath Sentinel and Times, July 10, 1862. Mr. I>. C. Bailey 
recommends calling a public meeting, to make arrangements for 
a Celebration. 

T/ie same, July 22, 1862. The Mayor of Bath calls the meet- 
ing, for Monday, July 28, 

T/w same, July 29. Report of the meeting. 

Portland Press, July 30. Report of the meeting. List of Com- 
mittees, etc. 

Daily Evening Globe, St. John, N.B., August 23, 1862. " The 
First English Settlement in New England ; " by John Wilkinson. 

Portland Advertiser, August 28, 1862, The Order of the 
Celebration. 

The same, August 30, 1862, An Account of the Celebration; 
with Mr, John A. Poor's Oration, 

The same, September 3, 1862. Mr. Poor's Oration reprinted 
with corrections. Mr, T, D, McGee's Address, and Mr, R, 
K, Sewall's Response to a Toast. 

Bath Times, September 1, 1862. An Account of the Celebration. 

Portland Press, September 6. Mr. John Neal complains of 
the arrangements of the Celebration. 

Portland Advertiser, September 8. Mr, Charles J, Gihnan, the 
Chief Marshal, replies, 

Portland Transcript, September 4, An account of tiie Cele- 
bration, 

Bruvsiviclc Telegraph, September 6, An Account of the 
Celebration. 

Christian Mirror, Portland, September 9. "A Sermon preached 
at Phipsburg, Me., on the Sabbath after the Celebration, by Rev, 
Francis Norwood." 

The some, September 16, Mr. John A. Poor i-eviews Mr, 
Norwood's Sermon. 



67 

The same, October 7. " Popham Discussion : " Mr. Nor- 
wood replies to Mr. Poor ; and " Popham Errata : " Mr. John 
Wingate Thornton reviews Mr. Poor's article of September 16. 

ISew JorJc Journal of Commerce, November 6. Report of the 
October Meeting of the New York Historical Society. Remarks 
concerning the Popham Celebration by Mr. George Folsom and 
Mr. J. R. Brodhead. 

New York CJiristian Times, November 20. Fuller report of 
the same. 

Boston Evening Traveller, November 21. Correspondence of 
Rev. William S. Bartlett, of Chelsea, and Prof. Emory Wash- 
burn, of Cambridge, concerning the Speech of the latter at the 
Popham Celebration. 

Cuvgrcgational Quartcrhj, Boston, April, 1863, Vol. v., p. 143— 
160. "Colonial Schemes of Popham and Gorges. By John 
Wingate Thornton, Esq., Boston." A Speech at the First 
Popham Celebration, with twelve and a half pages of " Notes 
and Authorities appended as proofs." 

A few copies of this article were printed, with the following 
title page, as 

A Pamphlet. " Colonial Schemes of Poplium and Gorges, j 
Speech | of | John Wingate Thornton, P]sq., j at the | Fort 
Popham Celebration, | August 29, 1862, | under ihe auspices of 
the I Maine Historical Society. | Boston, 1863." 8vo, 20 pp. 
[This Speech is not contained in the Popham " Memorial 
Volume."] 

The above was noticed and discussed in — 

North American Review, July 1863, Vol. xcvii., p. 288. 

Christian Examiner, July 1863, Vol. Ixxv., p. 143. 

Historical Collections of tlie Essex Institute, August, 1863, 
Vol. V. pp. 175-192; by Mr. A. C. Goodell. 

Boston Review, November, 1863, Vol. iii., p. 641. 

Historical Magazine, New York, 1863, Vol. vii., p. 231. 



68 

Christian Mirror, Portland, April 28, 1863. 
Boston Journal, August 11, 1863. 
Boston Evening Transcript, April 24, 1863. 
Portland Transcript, May 9, 1863. 

A Pamphlet. " The Connection | of the | Church of England 
I with Early | American Discovery \ and | Colonization. | 
By the Rev. William Stevens Perry, M. A. ] Portland, Maine. | 
1863." 8vo, 7 pp. 

Messrs. Bailey and Noyes, of Portland, Publishers, in April, 
1863, issued a circular Prospectus for the publication of the 
" Memorial Volume ; " soliciting Subscriptions. 

" Memorial Volume | of the | Popham Celebration, | August 
29, 1862: | commemorative of the Planting of the | Popham 
Colony on the Peninsula of Sabino, j August 19, 0. S., 1607, | 
establishing the Title of England to the Continent. | Published 
under the direction of the | Rev. Edward Ballard, | Secretary 
of the Executive Committee of the Celebration. | Portland : | 
Bailey and Noyes. | 1863." 8vo. 368 pp. 

Bound with the same : — 

"English Colonization in America. [ A | Vindication of the 
Claims | of | Sir Ferdiuando Gorges, | as the ] Father of Eng- 
lish Colonization in America. | By John A. Poor. | (Delivered 
before the Historical Societies of Maine, and New York.) | 
New York: D. Appleton and Company. | 1862." 8vo. [Ad- 
dress, 92 pp. Appendix, 52 pp.,] 144 pp. 

"Popham Celebration | at | Sabino, | August, 1863." Pro- 
gramme in broadside. 

The Popham Celebration of August 29, 1863, Mr. George 
Folsom, Orator, was reported in — 

Portland Daihj Advertiser, August 31, 1863. 

Portland Daily Press, August 31, and September 3, 1863. 



69 

Bnmsioich Telegraph, September 4, 1863. 

Boston Witness and Advocate, September 11, 1863. 

Boston Courier, September 2, 1863. 

Portland Dalhj Press, September 30, 1863: "Popham — Set- 
tlement — Memorial and Celebrations." Signed ''P." [Mr. 
Greorge Prince.] 

A Pamphlet. " The Beginning of America | A | Discourse 
I delivered before the | New York Historical Society | on its 
Fifty-ninth Anniversary | Tuesday November 17 1863 | By | 
Erastus C. Benedict | New York | 1864." 8vo, 64 pp. 

Portland Daily Press, January 29, 1864. Notice of Meeting 
of the Maine Historical Society, and of Judge Bourne's Reply to 
Mr. Thornton's Pamphlet. 

A Pamphlet. "An | Address | on the | Character of the 
Colony I founded by | George Popham, | at the | Mouth of the 
Kennebec River August 19th [0. S.] 1607. | Delivered in Bath, 
I on the Two hundred and fifty-seventh Anniversary | of that 
Event. I By Hon. Edward E. Bourne, | ofKennebunk. | Delivered 
and Published at the request of the Committee on the Com- 
memoration. I Portland: | 1864." 8vo, 60 pp. 

The above was noticed and discussed in — 

Christian Mirror, Portland, February 21, 1865. 

Boston Evening Transcript, February 13, 1865 ; by Rev. George 
E. Ellis, D.D. 

Bath Daily Sentinel and Times, August 30, 31, September 1, 
1864. 

The same, March 16, 1865. "Fort Popham Colony." 

The same, March 16, 1865. "The Popham Settlement;" by 
Rev. Edward Ballard. 

The same, March 30, 1865. 

The same, July 7, 1865. 



72 

Boston Daily Advertiser, August 4, 1866: Report of the 
Meeting of the Maine Historical Society of August 2, containing 
a letter by Mr. John A. Poor, with regard to new evidences found 
in Carayon's Relations. 

The Popham Celebration of August 29, 1866, was reported iu 

Boston Daily Advertiser, September 1, 1866. 

Boston Joiirntil, September 1, 1866. 

New York Times, September 4, 1866. 

Neiv York Christian Intelligencer, September, 1866. 

Brunswick Telegraph, September 14, 1866. 

A Pajiphlet. " The Popham Colony | A Discussion of its 
Historical Claims | With a | Bibliography of the Subject | Bos- 
ton I Wiggin and Lunt 13 School Street 1866 " 8vo, 72 pp. 



LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 



013 983 519 



1 



